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)