IRED Bookclub discussion

This thread is for discussions of the bookclub's book for February, Invisible Cities.

This thread is for the people who have finished the book, so there will be spoilers for the entire book here!

Be sure to check out the thread once in a while during February, as we read the book. Don't hesitate to share your opinions - likes and dislikes - and any questions or discussions about the book you might have.

I urge all of you to check out this link after you've finished the book. It's a collection of concept art of the cities.

I've finished the book now, and I am still a bit confused. But I guess Calvino leaves it up to the reader to interpret what the many cities actually mean. As I see it, each city represents part of Venice (though really any city). So Marco Polo begins taking it apart piece by piece. He takes the fact that the city is crowded, then tells a story about that, as if the entire city is about that. He talks about careful people, as if they were hanging over a canyon, then makes up a city about that. And with that, I also see it as each city in the world being represented through the 40-50 cities explained in the book. Like, those 40-50 qualities are things that a city need. A city need crowds, careful people, strangers, a place for the dead to 'live', etc.

That's only my interpretation, and I'm sure there are many other ways to read the book.

I do think the book is better after I've read it. While reading it, I wasn't a fan, but after it gives stuff to think about. I'm glad it got suggested for this, because I probably hadn't read it on my own.

Naomi: "I urge all of you to check out this link after you've finished the book. It's a collection of concept art of the cities."

That's very cool, thank you for sharing!

I felt the same way after I was done. The entire book I was underwhelmed, but it's one of those reads you appreciate after it's finished.

I had some time on my hands today and managed to finish the book.

I really loved it. I had read a few of Calvino's books in the past I have always enjoyed his writing style and his incredible mixing of the realistic and the fantastic. This book had those elements in spades. I also really like the way it ended - rather than pulling together the various ideas and conversations into a grand moral or thesis of how people live together, Calvino leaves it to the reader to interpret the vast array of conflicting truths. Even the primary conceit of the novel (that Marco Polo is describing the cities to Kublai Khan) is called into question. I find it all beautiful and fascinating.

I hope to read it again in the future. I have a feeling that this is the type of book that evolves over multiple readings.

Ben wrote: "I had some time on my hands today and managed to finish the book.

I really loved it. I had read a few of Calvino's books in the past I have always enjoyed his writing style and his incredible mix..."

The beginning of the novel will almost definitely carry way more meaning after a re-read. I was way too busy trying to figure out what the point of the book was instead of appreciating it.

Am I the only one who kind of feels like I was overthinking the message of the book. I feel like it isn't that complex or confusing but I was reading it like I would read a Shakespeare play.

My favorite part is when Kublai Khan and Marco Polo have the discussion about deriving all existing cities from imaginary ideal cities. I interpreted it as an illustration of the tension between empiricism and idealism, with Kublai Khan's derivation of the world from the orderly representing idealism, and Marco Polo's derivation of the world from the chaotic as representing empiricism.

This goes along with the general dynamic between Kublai Khan and Marco polo, with the emperor following traditional lines of thought, while the Venetian is more representative of a modern/postmodern viewpoint.

Naomi wrote: "Am I the only one who kind of feels like I was overthinking the message of the book. I feel like it isn't that complex or confusing but I was reading it like I would read a Shakespeare play."

I'm not sure that there's really an overall "message", at least not in the traditional sense. However, all the cities present concepts that are worth spending time thinking about.

Also what are you guys' thoughts about why the cities are all named after women?

Christopher wrote: "Also what are you guys' thoughts about why the cities are all named after women?"

Wow, I didn't even notice that. Good eye!

Naomi wrote: "Am I the only one who kind of feels like I was overthinking the message of the book. I feel like it isn't that complex or confusing but I was reading it like I would read a Shakespeare play."

I thought (and still think) it was super confusing. But like Cristopher says, I'm not sure there's a single message but maybe messages for each city. Or maybe there is no message and it's just Calvino describing a bunch of dream-like cities. It's very open to interpretation, I think.

Christopher wrote: "Also what are you guys' thoughts about why the cities are all named after women?"

I hadn't noticed that. But I did notice that almost at all times, when a person was described it was a young woman. I remember one man, from the overcrowded city where everyone was eating ears of corn (that was also a really weird concept for a city, by the way), but it was almost entirely women in the cities. Maybe to make it more appealing to Kublai Khan? Or maybe Marco Polo is emphasising the women's importance in the khan's empire. It's definitely an interesting observation!

Also, the one city that makes everything super confusing to me is Argia on page 114 (Cities & The Dead 4). It's very clearly just dead people buried underground, right? Earth instead of air, streets full of dirt, rocks as clouds, "don't know if the inhabitants can move", worm tunnels and where roots twists, everyone being still. Compared to some of the cities up for interpretation, this is seems very literal. Like, it's literally just buried dead people. It confused me a lot, because it seems so literal. I'm probably missing something here though.

You guys made me curious, so I did a bit of research on the theme of women in this book. The theory that makes the most sense to me is that the book is built upon interpretation and personal imagination. We're reading these stories from the perspective of Marco, and as a man his desires in life include women. He's constructing these cities based on his desires and perspective. https://tessera.journals.yorku.ca/ind... This person does a much better job of explaining it, but you guys get the jist.

Any other theories?

Jonas wrote: "Also, the one city that makes everything super confusing to me is Argia on page 114 (Cities & The Dead 4). It's very clearly just dead people buried underground, right? Earth instead of air, street..."

I'm not sure about the meaning of it, but it seems that the key theme isn't that the people are buried, it's that we don't know anything about the city, and there's no way for its inhabitants to let us know about it. That's my guess considering the book (and postmodern novels in general) is pretty concerned with epistemology.

Naomi wrote: "You guys made me curious, so I did a bit of research on the theme of women in this book. The theory that makes the most sense to me is that the book is built upon interpretation and personal imagin..."

Great read! We usually think about male gaze as objectification of women; how does "place-ification" of women fit into this framework?

Christopher wrote: "Naomi wrote: "You guys made me curious, so I did a bit of research on the theme of women in this book. The theory that makes the most sense to me is that the book is built upon interpretation and p..."

In the past, at the most basic and primitive level women were often associated with the household/shelter/home due to often managing the home when the man was away hunting/etc.

Similarly, often ships, cars, machines made or used by men have often been given female names too, has to do with objectification as well as the ability to own/manage/make, I guess.

In the context of Invisible Cities and Marco Polo the story teller, who we imagine (or know by association to the real Marco Polo) is an explorer, we could interpret his stories of the cities as fiction too. That the fictitious Marco Polo himself made these cities up to entertain the invented listener Kublai Khan. In such context using female names for cities could be a way of anchoring the story at least a bit in reality by associating the typically gendered approach towards naming of our own real world.

Maybe went a little bit off topic here, but this could be one way of thinking about places names and gender.

Has anyone else read Calvino's 'If on a winter's night a traveler'? I was thinking about how metafiction is playing out in this book.

Marija wrote: "Christopher wrote: "Naomi wrote: "You guys made me curious, so I did a bit of research on the theme of women in this book. The theory that makes the most sense to me is that the book is built upon ..."

I have not, but I do see how metafiction comes into play. Calvino tells the story in a way that makes it very obvious that these cities aren't real. It reminds me of Slaughterhouse - Five in that aspect. I won't go into specifics of that notion, because that's one of the nominations for our next read, but Calvino's storytelling style reminds me of Vonnegut's.