/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.6701519]

Just finished it and my mind is blown.

Can any other readers who read it share their thoughts, analyises, feelings about it ?

It can be a good experience for me.

Cheers.

[Anonymous No.6701629]

>relativity
>uselessness of language, time and vision
>subjective comprehension

These are my deductions from it.

[Anonymous No.6701639]

>>6701519
The ending of that book is one that has stuck with me for years.

>The inferno of the living is not something that will be; if there is one, it is what is already here, the inferno where we live every day, that we form by being together. There are two ways to escape suffering it. The first is easy for many: accept the inferno and become such a part of it that you can no longer see it. The second is risky and demands constant vigilance and apprehension: seek and learn to recognize who and what, in the midst of inferno, are not inferno, then make them endure, give them space.

Fantastic book. Anything in particular you want to talk about? Do you know why the sections are titled in the way that they are? I could never figure it out

[Anonymous No.6701650]

>>6701639

My edition ( Turkish ) has three essays in the preface and the titles are analysed there.

I want to talk about the subjectivity in it. The more Polo gets better in Tatar language, the worse and duller their conversations become.

Also, in one of their last conversations, Polo claims that Khan can't comprehed the visions of Polo abou the cities as same as him and even the sailors of Venedic will dream about different cities than them.

Subjectivity is so coherent in it imho. What are your opinions on it ?

[Anonymous No.6701690]

>>6701650
Well I think you nailed the subjectivity of it and I also, as you said, picked up on the idea that articulation, ironically, only distracts from what is meant to be communicated. It seemed that Kahn had a better grasp of what the cities looked like when they sat in silence and Polo spoke through hand motions. Perhaps this is meant to be commentary on how complexities within language only serve to sever and divide populations?

I think another question to be raised is whether or not the real message needed to be communicated at all. Kahn seemed to be much happier when he was allowed "free play of imagination", which is a common theme of discussion in most aesthetic philosophy. Was it the message that was important? Or did the truth only damper the conversation?

[Anonymous No.6701702]

>>6701519
I thought it was shit tbh

[Anonymous No.6701720]

>>6701702

same here. vastly prefer umberto ecco

[Anonymous No.6701724]

I thought... I thought it was just about cool poems on cool concept cities...

[Anonymous No.6701734]

>>6701690
>Kahn seemed to be much happier when he was allowed "free play of imagination", which is a common theme of discussion in most aesthetic philosophy. Was it the message that was important? Or did the truth only damper the conversation?

Agree, agreed, agreeing, will agree.

It is the most haunting part of it I guess. We don't need be told about every detail. We don't need to see descriptions of things. We don't ever need to be shown things. I think the best way of handling things it to recreate them in our minds.

Its like Borges's remarks about being blind. It made him more creative. Also, in My Name Is Red ( Orhan Pamuk's novel ) miniature painters willingly blind themselves for being better at painting. I don't know why I used this example but what you said is exactly the dedaction I was feeling but can't describe in words.

[Anonymous No.6701743]

Also, recalling Berenice, there is an underlying theme of unity imho. Good and evil, dead and alive, godly and worldly all exist together in Calvino's cities.

Just like the final words of Polo, it is easier to be a part of hell than to find heaven and make it live.

[Anonymous No.6701755]

>>6701734
Ah, I'll have to read the latter work, I havent yet. Intriguing example though. Also, I can't be certain what the over-arching message was regarding relationships between humans, but I can't help but detect an air of pessimism within Calvino's writing. For example, the passage about the infwrno and the "inferno we create by being together." What does this mean? Furthermore, my favorite story within the work is about the city in which the civilians connect strings between the homes of civilians they are familiar with, all of which eventually lead to a confusing hindrance of a maze that restricts human movement. The city has to be knocked down and the reader is left with a feeling of relief. That, to me, seems to be commentary on how human relationships actually drag people down and make living more difficult. I can't be sure though. I remember reading this somewhere... I can't claim the idea as my own