Paradox? Riddle.

What differentiates the literal from the figurative, or from the metaliterary?  Nothing?  Everything?  There is no answer to those questions.  At least there is no correct answer, because only the author knows what he wanted the reader to interpret with a specific part of text.  “'Venice,' the Khan said.  Marco smiled. 'What else do you believe I have been talking to you about?'  The emperor did not turn a hair. 'And yet I have never heard you mention that name.'”  (Dialogue Section 6)  Daniel Solano said that this excerpt lit a light bulb in his head that made a connection between the descriptions of the literal aspects of the city and the novel.  His analysis was purely literal.  “Now that I think of it: the canals, the windows, the canoes, and transportation by land or by water, the women singing, they all portray Venice from different perspectives. It all concludes in that all the cities turn out to be the same place: Venice.”  (Venice: The One and Only, by Daniel Solano)  I disagree drastically.  Calvino, via Marco Polo, has expressed his desire for the reader to not take anything for granted and to second-guess every aspect of the book.  For this reason, I see no plausible scenario in which the city of Venice, is the city of Venice.  I am not sure of the explanation of this excerpt.  Perhaps it is a manifestation of a symbol within the novel, metaliterature.  But what if it is nothing more than a paradox?  That would be the vague explanation to give.  The inclusion of Venice, indirectly, inside every city that has been and will be described, persuades the reader to find a driving force behind the city itself that will serve as a link between the different aspects in these cities. 

“Millions of eyes look up at windows, bridges, capers, and they might be scanning a blank page. Many are the cities like Phyllis, which elude the gaze of all, except the man who catches them by surprise.” (Cities & Eyes 4)  “I thought: 'you reach a moment in life when, among the people you have known, the dead outnumber the living. And the mind refuses to accept more faces, more expressions: on every new face you encounter, it prints the old forms, for each one it finds the most suitable mask.'”  (Cities & The Dead 2)  “It is easy to get lost in Eudoxia: but when you concentrate and stare at the carpet, you recognize the street you were seeking in a crimson or indigo or magenta thread which, on a wide loop, brings you to the purple enclosure that is your real destination.” (Cities & The Sky 1)

The above agglomeration of excerpts explains the paradox that surrounds Venice.  Allow me to rewrite and try to clarify.  “Millions of readers look at the symbols, the metaphors, the descriptions and they might be scanning a blank page.  Many are the novels like Invisible Cities, which elude the gaze of all, except the man who catches them by surprise.”  (Cities & Descriptions 4)  “I thought: you reach a moment in the reading when, among the factors that you analyze, the confusing outnumbers the comprehensible.  And the mind refuses to accept more confusion, more paradox: on every new description you encounter, it prints the old forms, for each one it finds the most suitable mask.”  (Cities & Confusion 2) “It is easy to get lost in Invisible Cities: but when you concentrate and stare at the text, you realize the explanation you were seeking in the literal or factual or simple thread which, on a proper analysis, brings you to the enclosure that is your real destination.”  (Cities & Explanations)

Three Elements

When reading Invisible Cities there comes a point when one must accept that the author has swindled you of your ability to analyze. Calvino uses metaliterature to describe the reasons why he is writing, and to explain why his work is inexplicable. He has impersonated the reader of his book in Kublai Khan’s character.    “No one, wise Kublai, knows better than you that the city must never be confused with the words that describe it.”  (Cities & Signs 5)  He is telling us here that we must not take his descriptions of ‘cities’ and deal with them as if they are the book.  We must not analyze the descriptions that he offers as the content of the book, as the plot.  In truth there is no plot.  There is only: literal, figurative, and most importantly metaliterary aspects. 

The literal serves the purpose of descriptions, it transitions the reader, and it supports the other two elements.    “From a mountainside, camping with their household goods, Ersilia's refugees look at the labyrinth of taut strings and poles that rise in the plain.”  (Trading Cities 4) Perfectly exemplified in this excerpt, the descriptions in this book are literal.  The mountainside that Marco describes doesn’t mean anything obscure.  There is no paradox here.  The literal is a sort of false front.  Calvino uses descriptions to fool the naïve reader into believing that he must analyze them, but in truth, that is the how not the what. 

The figurative is used by Calvino to make a point.  “Whether Armilla is like this because it is unfinished or because it has been demolished, whether the cause is some enchantment or only a whim, I do not know.  The fact remains that it has no walls, no ceilings, no floors: it has nothing that makes it seem a city, except the water pipes that rise vertically where the houses should be and spread out horizontally where the floors should be: a forest of pipes that end in taps, showers, spouts, overflows.”  (Thin Cities 3)  Here Calvino wants to, at least in my interpretation, compare the city of Armilla to cities in Europe that seem to be too confusing and unplanned.  He wants to compare something literal, the description of Armilla, to something figurative, the infrastructure of a city that doesn’t exist, at least by that name. 

The metaliterary is used to describe the book— or as DiCaprio would say, a book within a book— in this way, Calvino can intervene on behalf of himself in the character of Marco Polo.  '”Signs form a language, but not the one you think you know.'” (Cities & Signs 4)  Calvino uses the metaliterary to communicate to the reader that it is imperative that they break the inherited customary reading mold if they are to understand and enjoy Invisible Cities.  He wants to warn the reader that the symbols and signs that he uses must be construed as a completely new type of element.