Respond! Explore! Extend! Debate! Be resourceful. Try to move back and forth between general, overarching insights and specific textual analysis. Be resourceful! (What resources do you have? Your notes from class discussion about the webs. Your passage responses. The notes Mr. Telles posted after each summer session. Comments posted about the summer sessions. The novels themselves. Click on the following links for the significant excerpts from the novels available on Google Books: Invisible Cities, Invisible Man, Wide Sargasso Sea.)
Note:
In Mr. Cook's class we didn't get to talk about Invisible Cities so here are excerpts from the Invisible Cities webs.
"[Reading Invisible Cities] we start to question our understanding of what is real and what is unreal, and if there is a difference between them, or [if they're] just what we know already and what we [have] yet to know...Kublai didn't know if the cities existed, and neither did Marco, the only thing Marco knew was that the city he described to Kublai was a possible city that he could find. The author us[es] cities as a microcosm for alternate realities."
Here are some supporting quotations:
"Futures not achieved are only branches of the past: dead branches."
"It is a city made only of expectations, exclusions, incongruities, contradictions. If such a city is the most improbable, by reducing the number of abnormal elements, we increase the probability that the city really exists. So I have only to subtract exceptions from my model, and in whatever direction I proceed, I will arrive at one of the cities which, always as an exception exists. But I cannot force my operation beyond a certain limit: I would achieve cities too probable to be real."
"[Kublai says] 'why do you speak to me of the stone? It is only the arch that matters to me.' [Polo answers] 'without stones there is no arch.'"
"[T]hose who strive in camps and ports exist only because we two think of them, here, enclosed among these bamboo hedges, motionless in time."
& an excerpt from another Invisible Cities web:
"The main themes that are mentioned are the value that each city holds, the support they have, the city's invisibility, the invisible cities made within Polo's mind that are then transformed into words for the Khan's ears. Throughout the whole book, Polo weaves words into his stories creating invisible cities inside the Khan's mind, allowing him to think of these cities as part of his empire, which he believes will perish at the end of his reign."
& here are a few more quotations:
"'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.'"
"And Polo answers, 'Travelling, you realize that differences are lost: each city takes to resemble all cities, places exchange their form, order distances, a shapeless dust cloud invades the continents. Your atlas preserves the differences in tact: that assortment of qualities which like are like the letters in a name.'"
"'This is the aim of my explorations: examining the traces of happiness still to be glimpsed, I gauge its short supply. If you want to know how much darkness there is around you, you must sharpen you eyes, peering at the faint lights in the distance.'"
After discussing Wide Sargasso Sea in class, many thoughts and ideas had been brought up and debated. I agree that Antoinette found comfort in the wild, and everywhere she felt safe seemed to be destroyed. Even her marriage with Rochester seemed forced. As we brought up in class, Antoinette had the option of leaving brought up by Christophine but she could not leave Rochester. Leading me to the thought that she actually felt comfort in an unloving environment with no base to it. This scene angered me to no ends, it also almost put me to the point that I was pissed off with Antoinette. Then we spoke about in class which narrative we trust more: Rochester or Antoinette? I think I trust Rochester more because I don't exactly know his past like Antoinette and he actually has some sane thoughts inside his head. Once he starts to lose himself to the island though, he gets angered by it. I am definitely not saying I like Rochester, I dislike him so much, but I trust his thoughts more than Antoinette. Antoinette is a very unstable woman who has never had a figure in her life but she also starts losing herself. Lastly, we discussed the thoughts on the concept of the two deaths. Antoinette's mother states that she believes someone has two deaths in their life. One is when the soul dies and the other is when the physical body dies. We discussed whether or not Antoinette's soul dies within the novel. I think that it hasn't necessarily died, but it is dying out, like a candle that is lit on a shortening wick. After she catches Rochester cheating on her with the servant, she loses it like her mother lost it when Antoinette's brother dies. Then once she is torn away from the island and brought to London, she is locked away and seems to have gone crazy (although she remembers everything that happens). But the last bit, she gives us hope as she goes down the stairs with her candle.
ReplyDeleteWe sadly did not get a chance to discuss Invisible Cities in class, which was not the best since I did not personally like the book. Further explanation and thoughts about the book would have been nice but we ran out of time. But I noticed though out the novel the cities were only named after females. There were no male figures in the book besides Khan and Marco Polo. I think Polo did this to keep the attention of Khan but I think he also should have brought in male figures to help even things out. It also aggravated me that in the end, come to find out, Polo was only talking about one city the entire time. He was just speaking about different parts of the city and everything else was from his imagination. But at the same rate, the writing itself was beautiful. I loved the style of writing and Calvino really pulled it off. Such examples include: “The city however, does not tell its past, but contains it like the lines of a hand, written in the corners of the streets, the gratings of the windows, the banisters of the steps, the antennae of the lightning rods, the poles of the flags, every segment marked in turn with scratches, indentations, scrolls.” (Calvino 11)and “POLO: Perhaps all that is left of the world is a wasteland covered with rubbish heaps, and the hanging garden of the Great Khan’s palace. It is our eyelids that separate them, but we cannot know which is inside and which outside.” (Calvino 104). The first quote is just amazingly written, describing the city like a hand (which I completely agree with). The second one brings up a common theme which is trash and/or waste. I like how Polo states that position in the world depends on who's point of view.
Invisible Man is without a doubt a unique novel. The book plays with the themes of identity, racial tension, and power. I hated how the main character never revealed his name, all though I understand the reason. The reason was that the author wanted the reader to focus on his personality, not his name, that way the reader can judge the main character fairly. However, because I did not know the narrator’s name, I felt disconnected from the main character. I felt like the main character was just another person I have seen on the street before, but never really got to know, which is weird because throughout the novel we learn a lot about the main character. However, I did not feel disconnected from his surroundings. Like we had discussed in class, the author uses tangible descriptions of the Invisible Man’s surroundings, from the southern college campus to the streets of Harlem. You felt like you were immersed in the story with the Invisible Man. In the novel, power seemed to be something that everybody was obsessed with. Even in today’s world, people are obsessed with power. People assume that power is something that will land them respect, and most of the time they are right. Just look at Mr. Norton for example. He was a successful and well-respected man. Also, racial tension was obviously a major theme in the novel. The Invisible Man struggled to be successful in a world where black people are low-class and white people run the show. At the end of the novel, I was distraught when the main character chose to stay underground. Even though he promised to go above ground, you never found out. I wanted the narrator to never give up like he did when he chose to go underground, because that would be like admitting defeat to the Mr. Nortons, Dr. Bledsoes, and the Brotherhoods of the world.
ReplyDeleteLike Shae, I was sad that we did not get a chance to discuss Invisible Cities. I was a little bit confused about the novel and it would have been nice to hear other people’s perceptions of the book. I think the main themes of the novel were identity and the protection that society can provide for its citizens. In Marco Polo’s descriptions, you heard all about the city’s outward appearance, but you heard vaguely about the people living in the city. Each and every person has an identity and a story, and it made me wonder about the identities of the people that scramble around in the city. Also, the descriptions of the city made me think, “Okay, that’s great, but what do you do for your people?” And then I started thinking about what a city is supposed to provide for its people. Its supposed to provide housing, jobs, and, in theory, equal opportunities. A society is supposed to protect its people. But for some reason, I got the sense that the people had to provide for themselves. Which is a sad, lonely, and invisible way to live.
As we discussed Wide Sargossa sea we talked about how the story was told, and if we could trust the narration going on at different parts of the book. My self like others in the class found it harder to trust Antoinette's narration if you could trust her at all. We came to a partial agreement on the reason why we didn't trust her, was that we saw the way that she was raised, But i somewhat disagree. I believe it is not as much we didn't trust her because we knew how she was raised, but that we trusted Rochester more, because we didn't know how he was raised. I gave him the benefit of the doubt, so i trusted what he said was more likely to be true. Another reason i trusted Rochester's narration over Antoinette's was the way the author described them. Antoinette was more wild and "free"/impulsive so i trusted her less the the cool, calm, and collective Rochester. The author set up the book so that Rochester would seem more rational, and that we would trust in his narration over that of Antoinette's, and to me it worked. i trusted the more composed narrator over the unpredictable one, and this applies to more, if i interviewed people for a job i would pick the one that could be calm under pressure, and in wide Sargasso sea that is Rochester.
ReplyDeleteDuring our discussion of invisible man we talked a lot about the identity of the narrator, and not because his name was never given, but because he doesn't seem to know who he is until the end of the book. As discussed he(the narrator) always identifies himself with a group, he had almost no identity on his own. At first he was part of college, then he was a member of the brotherhood. Now some said he didn't find his identity until it was to late, it was to far towards the end of his book after he left the brotherhood, i disagree. Although he was still figuring out who he was after he got out of the brotherhood, he started to do so while he was still a member. The narrator started to identify with himself through his speeches, and minor rebellions against society, or the way that African Americans were treated. He became his own man when he stopped listening to everything that was told to him, he started making his own choices, but most of all he started to connect with his grandfather, and what he said on his death bed. he was able to see what the white society was doing to the African Americans, keeping them separated so they are happy, but kept them under oppression. The narrator described the life people were living to being blind in one eye, they could see were they were going, but they couldn't see who was on the other side of the road throwing rocks at them. So the narrator was finding his identity while in the brotherhood, and subconsciously pushed his identity through his speeches. Sharing his ideas, not the brotherhood's to the black community. So the narrator was well on the way to discovering himself while at the brotherhood, although i don't think he ever found his true identity, he was about as close as a lot of people.
The majority of our discussion in class about Invisible Man centered around identity and the quest the Invisible Man went on to find it. The class came to a general consensus that that Invisible Man finds his identity through himself rather then others, however we debated whether it was fully possible to find your identity completely. We then branched into a discussion about the essence of an identity, and wondered if you could ever reach the point where you undoubtedly knew you had found yourself.
ReplyDeleteWe also touched on different levels of consciousness throughout Invisible Man and appreciated the fact that Invisible Man was written on a foundation of grounded points, which in turn created an objective novel that was overall easier to process and understand. I concluded to myself that my subconscious was significantly more active in Invisible Man then in Invisible Cities. This conclusion came about because of the debate Maryka and Eleanor had about assuming things about the Invisible Man and what he was constantly surrounded by, where I then noticed that my mind was considerably more aware and alive while reading Invisible Man.
The class also discussed the prologue and epilogue in a bit more detail then other parts of the novel. I still agree with those who said that Ellison didn’t want the Invisible Man to have an identity throughout the book, and wonder if he was saving this realization of an identity for the epilogue. I ponder this because the epilogue was filled with the Invisible Man’s thoughts about commitments, values, and his life thus far, which seemed like an obvious attempt at locating a long lost identity.
Overall I was glad that we got a chance to discuss Invisible Man in such detail and length in class as it was helpful to hear other’s interpretations and thoughts on certain events. The debates and conflicting thoughts only added to my understanding of the novel as a whole and definitely made me want to read novels with a more receptive mindset in the future.
-
Invisible Cities was a novel that I will associate with frustration and tension for a long time to come. Although I was looking forward to discussing Invisible Cities in class, mostly to assert my not so fond opinions of the book, I think there are still valid points to be discussed on the blog.
While I was reading Invisible Cities, I often found myself wondering about the relationship that Marco Polo and Kublai Khan shared. I can’t help but remember thinking it was extremely difficult to understand and additionally about the reasoning behind making them so immensely interdependent. The two characters stand on completely different sides of the spectrum: Kublai Khan is an old, failing emperor, while Marco Polo is on the cusp of greatness, young and bursting with intelligence. Yet, they are still able to relate to each other on numerous levels. Their connection is puzzling, yet I couldn’t picture it any other way.
Another part of Invisible Cities that I found particularly glaring, like Olivia, was when Marco Polo revealed, quite simply, that he had been describing the same city to Kublai Khan for the entirety that they had been speaking. Polo defends himself and his actions by stating that he is afraid of losing the city he loves, therefore by integrating the canals, the water, the architecture into the magical stories he told, he keeps Venice entirely in his mind, and will therefore never manage to leave it, of course, at the expense of Kublai Khan. While I found this infuriating, I also noted loyalty and pride beaming from Marco Polo, and couldn’t help but think he was exceedingly brilliant for doing what he did.
There are plenty of topics, quotes, themes and ideas that could be discussed in length and detail regarding Invisible Cities. This alone is a testament to the novel as a whole and the effect it eventually has on every reader.
Invisible Cities was absolutely a difficult book to get your head around it and if you're like me, you had to read certain parts over again to understand the passage. I'm a big reader, but this book, in particular, didn't catch my fancy. I did appreciate Calvino's style of writing and imagination. The novel brings up so many questions because it doesn't have a base line. What is or isn't real? What is a city? etc. etc. I was looking over my note of the book and I was reading over the "Without the stones there is no arch quote" (Calvino 82) and I think I see some good foreshadowing in that quote. In the end, it is revealed that he is only talking about one city the entire time and he was just describing different parts. It backs up his philosophy of how one thing would be nothing without it’s component, such as arches need stone. It reminds me much of Rome, which was a city-state. It was a very big nation with many parts to it.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I believe that Calvino was definitely inspired by different aspects of society to create his cities, if that makes sense. For example, One city that stood out to me was Thekla, because they spent years and years trying to build the rest of it’s city, but never finished the project. It was because their blueprint was the stars. And it was that way because they didn’t want the city to be destroyed eventually; it was a defence mechanism. The leaders of that city had some vulnerability, and that’s what I liked about it. I also question what kind of people Kublai Khan and Marco Polo were when I was reading. Did Marco Polo love to exaggerate his stories to make things more interesting or did he find hope in creating more cities so his empire could expand? Or were the reality of the cities based on how Khan heard about them?
I felt like I got a pretty good understanding of Invisible Man. I do agree with Tucker that we focus on the narrator's identity because he is never sure of who he really is. Throughout his life he always followed the way of a group or someone else rather then listen to himself. In society he was a black man, that was discriminated enough as it is, and then throughout the book, he kept letting people knock him down until he hit rock bottom. However, I do disagree with Tucker in the case of not being able to find his identity. I don't believe he ever hit rock bottom, because at the end of the novel there is potential for him to start from scratch and begin his own journey to find himself.He realized what the problem was, and it gave him light that the problem can be fixed. And as long as he had the motivation, he would be able to do so. While reading you could only figure out some of his identity, through his speeches,his education, and little word of his family, and groups that he was a part of, such as the Brotherhood. People had always told him what to do and he never followed his own way. He never mentions his name, he hates it when ever his name is mentioned. I guess it’s because he considered himself invisible, and no one ever identified him by name anyway, so he finds no use for it. I felt like many people could relate to the Invisible Man, because once in every person’s life, everyone has felt invisible. This novel can connect with society today as it did when it was written, people can still be discriminated by culture and color of skin. And a question that came to mind was, how would this novel be different if “jack the bear” was a white instead of black?
In Wide Sargasso Sea, there was the trust issue of the narrators throughout the book. It was hard to trust either one of them. Rochester is one of the narrators that you do not know much about his past, so it is hard to trust someone you do not know. Antoinette on the other hand is a character that you can find out more of her past but is an untrustworthy character. Antoinette is an unreliable narrator because of her past. There was the fire that killed some of her family, her mother going insane, marrying someone she does not love, the list goes on. Rochester is unreliable because of his mostly unknown past and he is a greedy person for marrying Antoinette for money. If I had to pick one to trust more, I would pick Rochester. As we talked about in class, Rochester is a more “grounded conscious” personality which in my opinion is a one or a couple strands of thoughts that are up for little interpretation. Antoinette's personality is more of a “stream conscious” personality, which from what I gathered are tons of strands of thoughts that can be taken in just about anyway. I have a tendency to trust people who are more grounded because it is easy to connect to a couple of thought as opposed to hundreds. I feel that if Antoinette was in her home environment with a staple mother figure, she would be much more reliable narrator. Both of them had one event that made them less reliable than before. For Rochester, that moment was when he cheated on Antoinette late in the book, that showed how much of a terrible person he is. That moment for Antoinette was when she had the opportunity to leave Rochester, but did not. This shows that she is a little bit insane for not leaving a bad thing for hopefully a good change.
ReplyDeleteLike the others in my class, I was not able to discuss Invisible cities in class. The major things that stuck out to me in the book was if the cities were real or if it was one city and the conversations between Marco Polo and Kublai and how they related to his kingdom. I do not believe that Marco Polo was only talking about one city the entire book. This quote can be interpreted many ways, “Polo said: 'Every time I describe a city I am saying something about Venice.'” (Calvino 86) I interpreted this quote as a description for each city. When I read that I thought that Marco Polo compared each city to Venice. Also, I thought each city's description was described like Venice to make each city more enjoyable. Which also makes Venice seem like the most beautiful city because Marco Polo can take the best parts of each city and make them into Venice. So, I also interpreted the quote as a connecting piece to all of the cities, not that Marco Polo was describing one city. “'I know well that my empire is rotting like a corpse in a swamp, … Why do you not speak to me of this? Why do you lie to the emperor of the Tartars, foreigner?'”(Calvino 59) I like the metaphors Kublai makes about his empire in his conversations with Marco Polo. I believe that the whole point for Marco Polo being there is so Kublai can more knowledgeable. This quote shows that Kublai can be clueless: “'If each city is like a game of chess, the day when I have learned the rules, I shall finally possess my empire, even if I shall never succeed in knowing all the cities it contains.'” (Calvino 121) Both quotes relate the state of Kublai's empire, by him being clueless and him describing his empire as a “corpse in a swamp”, both were very well worded.
The Invisible Man in-class discussion helped broaden my perspective on certain aspects of the book. I agree with Tucker that the narrator did start to discover who he was when he was still a part of the Brotherhood. I think the scene in which the narrator began to realize the faults of the Brotherhood was also the scene that he realized his importance as an individual; the Sambo dolls and death of Tod Clifton. I think this scene brought up concepts that the Invisible Man was not comfortable with, such as the flaws within the Brotherhood and the fragile nature of man; these concepts were absolutely essential in his realization of the importance of individual human beings versus organizations that are, at their height, looking out only for their own interests.
ReplyDeleteI think it is interesting that Olivia said she felt more connected to the Invisible Man’s surroundings than to him. For me, it was the other way around. I felt as though, despite not knowing his name, I was connected to the narrator by emotional ties that can only be constructed through an intimate glance into a consciousness. While reading the book, I felt as though I was struggling with him. Contrarily, the cartoonish descriptions of the circumstances the Invisible Man found himself in made the setting seem distant and foreign. To me, this discomfort with his surroundings was important to my progress with the narrator; since I could not connect with the setting, I instead connected to the more familiar Invisible Man. I could empathize with him better than I could associate myself with what was around him. In class, Eleanor said that she could visualize the Invisible Man’s time in New York with extreme ease since she had seen the places he visited. I was not able to place him in the preset image of New York that I have as easily. Instead, I found myself visualizing less familiar streets and parks. I also found it difficult to place the narrator due to the time the novel took place.
(My post was not working when I tried putting both together, so I'm posting them separately.)
(Here's my second half, or the Invisible Cities half.)
ReplyDeleteInvisible Cities was much more difficult for me to connect do than was Invisible Man. It may be because there was no set theme that I had a prior opinion on, but I think it was also the lack of dynamic characters. It can be argued that Kublai Khan and Marco Polo had interesting dimensions, but they lacked the emotion and angst that makes for empathetic characters. Additionally, the strange relationship and interaction between Kublai Khan and Marco Polo made them even more distant to me. As Clare stated, the importance of their relationship was evident, but its origin was shaky.
The parallels between the cities were unexpected instances of familiarity, but they also caused some frustration for me. I did not understand the importance of the connections between some of the cities. Also, in certain cities, like in the city with the multiplying simpletons, I could not figure out when Polo brought it up at all. For Khan, it would have been important if it were real, because every stone is important to an arch, and Polo told him; however, since it was a fabricated city, I do not understand its merit.
Like Patrice and Shae, I loved some of the passages Calvino created; they were beautiful and meaningful. I also thought that many of the connections between the cities were full and rich, and added to my overall understanding of the book.
The passage in which the quote focusing on rubbish and trash that Shae brought up was one of my favorite passages of the book. A quote by Khan started the dialogue: “Kublai: Perhaps this dialogue of ours is taking place between two beggars nicknamed Kublai Khan and Marco Polo; as they sift through a rubbish heap, piling up rusted flotsam, scraps of cloth, wastepaper, while drunk on the few sips of bad wine, they see all the treasure of the East shine around them.” It was a very striking idea, and it resonated with me throughout the rest of the book. I think that it brought together many of the confusing aspects of the cities, and it definitely clarified some of the banter between Khan and Polo by offering a different explanation as to their definite whereabouts. The passage made me realize that the location and setting of Khan and Polo was not necessarily as it seemed, which relieved some frustration for me.
The core of Invisible Man is unarguably identity, as everyone has said. However, I agree with Tucker that the Invisible Man hasn't come into a true identity by the end of the novel. There are two kinds of identity described in the story: social and personal. The outward identity or the inward identity (or however it was Mr. Cook described it.) The narrator spends much of the book focusing on his social identity while only quietly mulling over his personal identity, thus he lacks a lot of personal identification and seems to just try to meld in with whatever group he is associated with. He has sacrificed a personal identity for a social one. By the end of the novel, he has completely thrown off his social identity in such a way that allows him to focus more on his personal identity. He becomes invisible, thus sacrificing his social identity for a personal one. Though his personal identity is more developed come the end of the novel, it isn't fully realized (as we discussed in class, no one may ever have a fully realized identity.) It was unclear to me whether he had developed his own identity, or whether he had convinced himself he had developed his own identity. Whatever the case, the core of one's true identity relies on a reconciliation of those two kinds. This is an important thing lacking in the narrator by the end of the novel. Though he knows himself better, and he knows the outside better, he doesn't attempt to redevelop a social identity. The moment in the novel when, I feel, he seems most to be in balance with himself is in the middle of the book, immediately after his re-birth, when he is eating candied yams and doesn't care about who sees him doing it or what they think (as he would have before.) This is a period where he has cast off the previous social identity and before he joins the brotherhood and develops that one. Though he is on his own, he isn't a recluse. In this way he is still social (to some degree) but hasn't been overcome by an assumed identity.
ReplyDeleteUnlike a few people here, I really liked Invisible Cities. It didn't draw my attention the same way a narrative does, but instead attracted me to it with a lot of different, vividly described, ideas. Invisible Cities was a book of settings and ideas, not really characters. Reading through, I got the impression that a lot of the cities could make excellent settings for other stories, but of course they are never used for that. Though their literal purpose is to be a setting, that isn't what they are really used for, and I don't get the impression that Calvino intended them to be just settings. Each of the cities is meant to describe some human idea, or facet of human society. If you look at the book as a string of loosely connected vignettes with a frame story based upon Polo and Khan (which is really what it is) it is a lot easier to look at the meaning in individual cities.
On the other side of the coin, I disagree with Maryka. There was a set theme that went throughout the book, two that I can think of, actually. Invisible Cities is about perception (as many post-modernist sort of books are.) The book is hard to interpret because it doesn't offer an obvious interpretation, and leaves a lot more to the reader than longer narratives do. For example, though many people have brought up how all the cities are Venice, you can't take that for fact. The novel is rife with unreliable narration (the narrator gets stuck in an inescapable city twice.) Though Polo says that, you can't be sure whether he is being honest, as no narration in the book is trustworthy, especially in the latter half of the book where things only get foggier and more surreal. The fallibility in the narration only underlines the importance of perception, since interpretation is subjective. Furthermore, towards the end, the characters even seem vaguely aware that they are in a work of fiction (if memory serves, I don't have the book with me,) making even their perception of the situation more unclear.
Eleanor K
ReplyDeleteFocusing the first few days of discussion on Wide Sargasso Sea allowed us, as a class, to divulge deeper into Antoinette's character. Over one of the summer sessions, it was mentioned that she never has a safe place in her life where she can feel comfortable. As a class, I think we can agree that the island environment shows this aspect as well. She feels most at home on the island, but can see the dangers and unstableness that comes with it. Another topic that came up about Wide Sargasso Sea was Rhyse's choice of narration. The story is started from the perspective of Antoinette, and eventually begins to go back and forth between her and Rochester. Although there is never a clear answer as to the reliability of each narrator, we discussed this topic in great detail. The majority of the class seemed to distrust Antoinette because of her past, and have a tendency to see things from Rochester's point of view. I completely understand this reasoning and halfheartedly support it as well. On the other hand though, I have a gut feeling to trust Antoinette because of her passion. When I look at Rochester I see a cold man who may or may not have ulterior motives in marrying Antoinette. I feel like he can lie easily, and holds back some truth in both his thoughts and actions. Antoinette however, appears as the more human character in my eyes. When she narrates the book I know that everything that is written is exactly how she views it. As Mr. Cook pointed out in class: she may not have the most clear and objective perspective on the story, but she most definitely believes in what she narrates. This quality allows me to connect with her more than her husband. In class, this same discussion morphed into one about subjective vs. objective narration. Rhyse's choice to have a streaming narrative forced us to focus on the personalities and aspects of each character almost as much, or more than, the basic plot of the story. Although I must agree with Clare that Invisible Cities could be, at times, ridiculously frustrating and puzzling, it was definitely my favorite of the three books we read this summer. Calvino's writing style and beautiful use of language made it enjoyable to read and relatively simple to understand the basic concepts. I especially liked how Calvino took out almost all aspects of a plot in order to focus on what he was really trying to say. The relationship between Kublai Khan and Marco Polo was the only part of the book that distinctly resembled a true plot. That too however, was questionable. The characters could not have, in historical reality, ever actually met. Knowing this all along allows the reader to listen to what they are saying about each city more than what they are saying to each other. There were points in the book where I questioned if the conversation was even happening, or if it was simply the imagination of one or the other. Calvino even says in parts that the conversation wasn't actually happening, it was just hand motions and eye contact that was making the communication possible at all. This lack of a concrete base for the story explains why many people were frustrated with the book as a whole. For me however, I think it is why I liked it as much as I did. As one of the creators of an Invisible Cities Web also did, I especially liked the quote about the stones making up the arch. The quote highlights Khan and his view that the empire as a whole is the most important thing. Polo's contrasting character states that without the stones (each city, or in actuality, each aspect of the city) the arch (or empire) can not exist. This quote is definitely a central point in the book that Calvino uses to contrast the two main characters.
The major theme that came out of our discussion of Invisible Man was Identity. We spoke about how the narrator changes his identity at each step of his journey and about how he allows others to shape his outward identity because he is in pursuit of a goal. I agree with Lucas in that the Invisible Man had 2 identities the one that was determined by the people around him and the one he determined for himself. He choose to no longer allow people to create an identity for him and that is when he becomes "invisible". I really love this concept and it ties in very well with the other books we read this summer, the idea that part of what defines and person or an object is how it is seen by another person. This is huge theme invisible cities.
ReplyDeleteI was not around for my classes discussion of invisible cities but here are some of my thought: Invisible Cities, to me was all about lenses or prospective and how it take many lenses to get a full picture. Marco Polo has traveled all over the world and seen many cities and meant many people but he compares all cities to his first city. Venice is the lens through which he see the world. It takes many perspectives to fully understand something as complicated as a city, like when Polo talks about the blocks that make up the whole. The whole can not exist with out the pieces. Each of the the cities represent a different prospective on a signal city. The book also brings up langue and story telling and the different pieces that make up the whole that is communication. Words are nothing by themselves they need attached to an object or an idea and attached to the object or idea must come prospective and understanding and then a consensus that a word means the same thing to one person as it does to another. Many parts make the whole. Often times you can not be sure that any of what Khan is hearing is what Polo means to be saying because you don't have all of the pieces.
In my class (Mr. Telles’ class) one project for Invisible Man that struck me was LJ’s web. He explained many ways that the author was trying to show that the narrator was trying to find his own path rather than himself. One concept that he brought up was that throughout the book the narrator never left one path without the help of another. There was always someone there who had another path laid out for him to follow. I also noticed this is the book and thought it was a very interesting to the concept of the story. It left me wondering if there was no one there for him to follow, would his search for his own identity have ended sooner? He eventually would have had to create his own path, even if he wasn’t truly aware of it. And on that path, he would find out what he wanted and what truly made him who he was.
ReplyDeleteAnother interesting perspective on the book came from another project, where they thought that maybe the narrator had finally given up o finding an identity because he figured out that it wasn’t important. I think it’s more that he found that the search for an identity is pointless because there is always going to be different identities given to you; whether by yourself or by others around. However, you can’t really “find” your identity. It will come naturally. Maybe his identity was that he was a follower, he wasn’t meant to be a big man on a big sate. He was meant to be the “invisible man”.
Invisible Cities came with another interesting point of view. It was presented in class that every city is based off the same city; as that every city is the city in the future, but it’s just waiting for something to trigger it. I thought it was an extremely interesting thought on the book and how each of the cities are one in the same. I could understand how this is what the story as whole is about, seeing as there is always something that connects all of the cities. The quote brought up was “The city is redundant so that something will stick in their minds.” I’m not sure if it’s the redundancy of each of the cities that make them one in the same, I thought that perhaps it was the lack of certain things that together they would form the whole city. This city is dark and gloomy, this city is bright and hopeful and together they make that balance of a city. So it's not that they all have something in common, it's that they all lack something that another one has. As my second favorite book of the three it's still hard to get a full grasp on the entire concept, but I do believe this could be a very good way of looking at it and viewing it.
Madness is one of the themes of Wide Sargasso Sea that was discussed. Madness is a product of your environment. What went on in Antoinette’s life drove her to madness. The fact that her brother died at a young age, while she was unconscious because she was so sick was one of the things that drove her mad. Also that her mother went mad and did not recognize her was another contributing factor. But can madness be genetic? There are studies that show that alcoholism can be genetic. So if alcoholism is genetic then can’t alcoholism be genetic too? If someone were to grow up with one of their parents being driven to madness, those qualities would present themselves in the child too. Was Antoinette really mad though? A student brought up the theme of fear. Antoinette was afraid of a lot. She was afraid that she was losing the love of her husband so much that she went to Christophine and asked to have a spell put on her husband. “I looked back at the end of the path. She was talking to Jo-jo and he seemed curious and amused. Nearby a cock crew and I thought, ‘That is for betrayal, but who is the traitor?’ She did not want to do this. I forced her with my ugly money. And what does anyone know about traitors, or why Judas did what he did?” (Rhys, 107) Antoinette was always seeing little things as bad omens. Yes, that was how she was raised and brought up to recognize omens. However, she seemed to be really afraid of them. It is important to grow up not being afraid of every little thing. If you do, you will live a very sheltered life. Sheltered lives do not do any good for anyone.
ReplyDeleteIn class a student brought up that he thought that the Invisible Man believed that identity was not important. Identity is important to the Invisible Man though. His identity is something that is quiet and not outspoken. Identities can be very different things for the same person. Another student said that you have an identity which is who you are, you also have one that is what you have (what other people see you as) and then another one which is the one that you want. The Invisible Man’s identity that he is is the one where he just quietly goes about his business and no one pays much attention to him. The one that people saw him as was someone who would do what told. This was especially shown when the Brotherhood handed him his new name. The identity that the Invisible Man wanted however was someone who makes great speeches and inspires people. He tried this for awhile with the Brotherhood but then he realized that the Brotherhood was just using him, they were not helping him at all. A student also brought up that the Invisible man decided to do what he wanted and not to worry about groups. The Invisible Man struggled with this throughout most of the novel but towards the end he figured it out. Other people’s opinion should not matter. You should be happy being who you are. It is part of being human though, looking for acceptance from other people. Power defines who you are. The amount of power you have defines who you are. Another student brought up the fact that power and identity are entangled. President Obama had a lot power and that is one of the way people and society sees him. Homeless people are not looked at with a lot of power and ideal. They are looked at as weak. Identity is environmental, it defines who you are and it is very important. It was brought up in class that society is a negative influence. I don’t agree because without society influencing us, we would not be who we are. We would all be the same person because without society influencing us we would all be the same.
Grabbing what Fiona just said in regards to Wide Sargasso Sea, I have to agree with the role that genetics may play in Antionette’s psychological evolution. However, genetics is not a fate, but a propensity. The alcoholism she mentions is not saying that people will become doomed to be attracted to overconsumption of beer, but that if beer passes their lips, genetic factors may conspire to create a growing dependence on it. Addiction, in a winder sense, could be a genetic thing. What the addiction attaches itself to is the issue.
ReplyDeleteIn Wide Sargasso Sea, Antionette likely has a propensity for emotional instability. She very well may not. What is certain is that the effects of ones environment are what shape us in almost every sense. Never having known safety and security, she seeks it. But having always not having known safety and security, she is attracted to it because it is a part of who she is. Never having been loved, she gives herself to Rochester. He, in turn, is also a product of his environment, having learned at a very young age to be cold and reserved. His repressed lust prevails, but Antionette confuses this for love. It isn’t, he doesn’t.
Rochester’s actions are reflective of who he is due to his environment. As Zoe pointed out in her thesis, he approaches everything with an imperialistic point of view. What is unknown is evil and must be conquered and thrust into the light. It must be made to fit the sensibilities of the English. He is entirely thwarted in this respect, and concludes that the island, in its wildness and mystery is against him, as well as this wife who he hardly knows.
Antionette is finally driven to the state that she ends up in when she is rejected in all the things she seeks, like Rochester. Unlike Rochester, who knows who he is, Antoinette has nothing to cling to to tell her who and what she is. She fits in nowhere, and Rochester’s cruelty in calling her “Bertha” takes away her last thing: her name. But I can’t help thinking – is Antoinette mad, or is she simply immersed in a society that is?
In regards to Invisible Cities, I’d like to join the likes of Megan and Lucas and throw my hat into the ring: I liked it. It was my favorite out of the three because of the way it made me think and offered so much material for grand, big picture meditation on the nature of people and of their cities. Fiona’s quote that she brought up, “The city is redundant so that something will stick in their minds,” is one worthy of thought. If, as the book so slyly leads one to realize, the cities are all one city, then this would be necessary. The redundancy is, ironically, what distinguishes a city. Each has a theme that is emphasized. And I completely love what Megan said – yes, these themes come together and balance each other, complete each other. And as Eleanor mentioned, via the resonant quote about the arch, the themes are what is most important. Themes are the theme of the book. Or rather, how they come together. How even whilst one ponders upon the abstract whole, the big picture, it should not be forgotten that that whole is only there due to the many pieces, or stones, or aspects of cities that make it what it is. It reminds me of the Chakra principles. Chakras, I believe originating from Hinduism but now also a new age sort of thing, are 7 energy points on ones body. They range from the top of the head to the hip, and each is concerned with various aspects of one’s self. The highest, or crown chakra, is the part of a person that is involved in deep meditation, big picture thinking, and so on. But one is cautioned early on that skipping right up to the crown chakra is not an option. First, one must be grounded. The lowest, or root chakra, is one’s connection to the earth and to reality. Polo serves to remind Khan that operating on the crown chakra is useless before one has become grounded, before one knows the stones.
After listening to excperts from Wide Sargasso Sea, I gained a new appreciation for the book and its characters. I originally didn't view Antoinette's life with as much sympathy as I think I should have. I knew how difficult her life was but I never really understood fully what she went through. After listening to the presentations, I tried to put myself in Antoinette's shoes and I do not believe I would have handled it at all like Antoinette did. After learning of my mother's insanity and my brother's death, I as Antoinette, would have cracked. I also realized that Antoinette has a bit of an undercover personality, meaning that she only really expresses how she is feeling when her emotions boil over and she has no choice but to let them out. I also began to look at her final act of rebellion, setting the house ablaze, as her last act to try and gain control of her life for the first time. I also never really looked at the identity crisis Antoinette went through until I listened to all of the Web projects. I did not see how something like being called a name other than your own could have such a damaging effect ans for Antoinette, it was truly devastating. I think a name would have such a huge influence on someone like Antoinette because it would be one of the only stable aspects of her life. A name is something that no one can take away from you because it is your own and when Mr. Rochester refers to her as Bertha, he is taking away one of the only things that she has control over. One thing that did not change from when I read the books through the Web presentations was my feeling of Mr. Rochester: I will never like him. I think he is shady and acts out of desperation and impulse without regards to anyone else, especially Antoinette. I also looked at the island and how it relates to Antoinette's life. An island represents isolation, seperation and a disconnect from anything solid. Antoinette has always been isolated in her life and she has never been able to connect with anyone. Society was unable to fit Antoinette into its barriers and so she seperated herself from it so she was unable to develop 'people skills.' I also realized that I need to be more careful when calling people 'crazy.' I would have called Antoinette crazy in an instant before listening to the webs but after hearing the presentations but I have realized that Antoinette isn't crazy, she is just desperately searching for control.
ReplyDeleteI found it difficult to connect to Invisible Cities and I think that a lot of my classmates felt the same way, due to the lack of Webs on the book. Howerver, the project that was on Invisible Cities did help me to understand it more thoroughly. Fiona said that all versions of a future city, exist in the present city. She said that the traits of the future city waait to unveil themselves until the right event comes along to trigger them. This forces me to think exactly how Marco Polo and Kublai Khan do. Marco Polo only knew that the cities might exist somewhere, and Khan knew the same. A chacractersistic of one city could exist in more than one city but it is diffuclt to prove if the city in question may not even be real. I try to look at how something could exist in the present but have yet to exist in the future. I think this is the effect that Calvino wanted the reader to have. The book forces the reader to view what is real and what is not. One quality that I truly enjoyed was that it forces the reader to look at the details. Marco Polo spares no details when he shares with Kublai Khan every last detail about the cities, and Calvino is really able to add a personal quality to every city. I also looked at how a story can change every time it is told and why Marco Polo would not want to divulge the details of Venice with Kublai so that he could remember the experince of being there rather than remember the stories about it.
I struggled with Invisible Cities. I found it difficult to follow themes. Fiona's web of Invisible Cities, made me think of it in a different way. She wrote about how growth is not linear, and how the cities grew in different way with the different themes. This made sense to me that the themes were not clear. The book looks at both the "[Kublai says] 'why do you speak to me of the stone? It is only the arch that matters to me.' [Polo answers] 'without stones there is no arch.'" stone and arch. The stone being more important to the exploration, and Marco Polo, and the arch being more important to the Emperor. This zooming in and out of the themes, and cities that gives the book meaning, and growth like Fiona say is a zig zag, in and out, in and out. Zeafoia, make be and in and Sophia maybe and out. The poster and the little discussion we had of Invisible Man really did make me appreciate the use of the cities for an over all theme.
ReplyDeleteInvisible Man
Though I was only in class for the some of the disscussions, by reading what my friends' had to say about invisible I notice that the themes are very similar between the Invisible Man and Wide Sargasso Sea. The most popular theme for both, and the theme that I wrote about for Wide Sargasso Sea, was identity. I thought it was interesting that though the Invisible Man and Antoinette struggle to discover their identity, the Invisible Man struggle in public as part of a society, and Anoinette struggles because of the isolation of her position. Many of the thesis for Invisible man focused on society role and the power struggle between the individual and the group. This I think happens in a smaller scale in Wide Sargasso Sea as well. I that Meg pointed out the difference between Society and culture, through Invisible Man, he could deny himself the southern food, and be apart of the Northern white culture but was still control by the Brotherhood or the society.