After reading the big "twist" in which Marco Polo tells Khan that he is talking only about Venice and that his cities doesnt exist but his ideas do. He also says that He is describing from Venice, more specifically from his memories. The thing that shocked me most is that i had already erased both Kublai Khan and Marco Polo from the stroy and just replaced them with myself and Calvino. So when I read this I saw that Calvino was actually talking from experience. He is talking about things he has been through and saw, he obviously hasn't gone to the cities he describes but he has been through the things the city means. This quote from an interview before writing Invisible Cities exeplifies the two most key concepts of the writing in the book: Metaliterature and memory analysis.
"I began doing what came most naturally to me – that is, following the
memory of the things I had loved best since boyhood. Instead of making
myself write the book I ought to write, the novel that was
expected of me, I conjured up the book I myself would have liked to
read, the sort by an unknown writer, from another age and another
country, discovered in an attic."
In the last sentence he completely explains his use of Kublai Khan and of metaiterature by seeing and writing the book from both a writers perspective (Marco Polo) and as a reader's perspective (Kublai Khan). In the previous acknowledges the importance from memories and how he can draw them with a present persepective to achieve an analysis with endless conclusions that vary on the moment you analyze them. To understand the book a level deeper we must see where it came from, where the memories originated. The key to this is in the first sentence. Following Freudian principles childhood tends to leave the strongest and resiliant scar in memory, both conciously and uncounciously.
I will not atempt to psyco-analyze Calvino because I have not studied four years of neurology and psychology and because I would just scratch a surface of what would be the ocean frozen over.
miércoles, 6 de junio de 2012
martes, 5 de junio de 2012
Getting Things Right
I will continue to anlyze the metaliterature aspect of the book because in my opinion, it went better than expected in my previous blog. Even though I was not expecting any enjoyment out of focusing on this aspect, I did. It is very intresting to see how Calvino describes how you are, or should be acting through Kublai Khan's character.
Kublai Khan (us), is proving less bothered and more curious. However he seems to be seeking aproval from Marco Polo (Calvino or the book itself). He presents a bold answer to explain and decipher Marco Polo's aim and model. Much like me and the rest in our blogs, we come up with this answers that are supposed to unravel Calvino's intentions and figure out every metaphor. We want to leave Calvino naked, stripped from all his complexity. However as much as we think our answer is smart and how simple Calvino's methods are, we are probably so caught up in our own little idea that we dont see all of the toying around Marco Polo (Calvino) is doing with us. As much as Kublai Khan is trying to deduce Marco Polo, Marco Polo is deucing the emperor even more. He doesnt do this with affirmations but rather questions and descriptions that leave Khan in the restless and as much as he tries to answer these questions he reveals a part of him and of his empire which he as so ignorant about. As I said in my previous blog, feelings are what model each city in the empire, this is vey much like hat Kublah is saying now in the sense that he is trying to create a pattern-based model for the cities. However as I am saying in this blog and how Marco Polo is saying in the book, this model we think we have is useless, it has so many exeptions to its rules that it would end up describing every city with a different rule. So what is the point to all this if we will never get the "answer" right, and why would we, its irrelevant. We learn more by making wrong answers, we learn why they are wrong and in an almost psycoanalytic way, he tells us why we though it was right!
Ofcourse this is all in a "meta" aspect, Calvino is not going to right me an e-mail telling me how far fetched and over compensating my connection to the space time continuum was.
Kublai Khan (us), is proving less bothered and more curious. However he seems to be seeking aproval from Marco Polo (Calvino or the book itself). He presents a bold answer to explain and decipher Marco Polo's aim and model. Much like me and the rest in our blogs, we come up with this answers that are supposed to unravel Calvino's intentions and figure out every metaphor. We want to leave Calvino naked, stripped from all his complexity. However as much as we think our answer is smart and how simple Calvino's methods are, we are probably so caught up in our own little idea that we dont see all of the toying around Marco Polo (Calvino) is doing with us. As much as Kublai Khan is trying to deduce Marco Polo, Marco Polo is deucing the emperor even more. He doesnt do this with affirmations but rather questions and descriptions that leave Khan in the restless and as much as he tries to answer these questions he reveals a part of him and of his empire which he as so ignorant about. As I said in my previous blog, feelings are what model each city in the empire, this is vey much like hat Kublah is saying now in the sense that he is trying to create a pattern-based model for the cities. However as I am saying in this blog and how Marco Polo is saying in the book, this model we think we have is useless, it has so many exeptions to its rules that it would end up describing every city with a different rule. So what is the point to all this if we will never get the "answer" right, and why would we, its irrelevant. We learn more by making wrong answers, we learn why they are wrong and in an almost psycoanalytic way, he tells us why we though it was right!
Ofcourse this is all in a "meta" aspect, Calvino is not going to right me an e-mail telling me how far fetched and over compensating my connection to the space time continuum was.
lunes, 4 de junio de 2012
Carats in a Diamond
When we exercised our understanding on metaliterature in class I got nervous, seeing that I did not grasp the idea as much as I thought I did. I read the next pages and really focused in analysing the book's metaliterature and move away from my ramblings that simultaniously moved away from the book itself.
Kublai Khan seems more restless as the book continious and, as well as me since the metaliterature indicates that he is the "audience", also however because just like the great Khan, I dont really get the book. This is no entirely true, I dont think there is acctually a way to "get" the book, as long as you can analyze and deduce something "meta", or get some meaning out of it I think that is valid. However that is not going to get me a four on my final. This should not come off as something Im doing for a grade but rather an effort to further expand my analytic skills and take the step beyond figurative and enter the spider web of metaliterature.
Kublai, in the mist of an argument, tells Polo about how his great empire is actually formed by hard work and grandure. Always assuming Kublai is us, then that would mean that our empire is our lives. Marco Polo describes the empire in terms of feelings, he does describes son physical wanders but all serving a purpose, to transmit a feeling (nostalgia, freedom, paranoia, etc). Kublai on the other hand just sees the diamond, and the crystals and how its all perfect and grand. This is not Marco Polo's objective. To answer the emperors dilema Marco describe how a city of his will rise over the others cities ashes, but most importantly of all he values this diamond of his based on unhappiness.
The diamond is the final outcome of his empire, making it the final utcome of our lives. How can you measure the carats on thi diamond, how can we measure our lives worth? To answer this we need to know in what does Marco believe our live is made up, and since the empire is our lives and the empire is made of cities then cities must be the measuring scale. Not amount of cities but what they contain, I said cities in the work described feelings but feelings come from experiences. Do we measure our lives by experiences? On how much and how strong feelings are felt, not on what we get materially or socially but actually internally? Do we measure our live's value based on how we feel about ourselves or how other people feel about us? Naive of me to think my existencial unrest was going to simmer down after Selfish Gene.
Kublai Khan seems more restless as the book continious and, as well as me since the metaliterature indicates that he is the "audience", also however because just like the great Khan, I dont really get the book. This is no entirely true, I dont think there is acctually a way to "get" the book, as long as you can analyze and deduce something "meta", or get some meaning out of it I think that is valid. However that is not going to get me a four on my final. This should not come off as something Im doing for a grade but rather an effort to further expand my analytic skills and take the step beyond figurative and enter the spider web of metaliterature.
Kublai, in the mist of an argument, tells Polo about how his great empire is actually formed by hard work and grandure. Always assuming Kublai is us, then that would mean that our empire is our lives. Marco Polo describes the empire in terms of feelings, he does describes son physical wanders but all serving a purpose, to transmit a feeling (nostalgia, freedom, paranoia, etc). Kublai on the other hand just sees the diamond, and the crystals and how its all perfect and grand. This is not Marco Polo's objective. To answer the emperors dilema Marco describe how a city of his will rise over the others cities ashes, but most importantly of all he values this diamond of his based on unhappiness.
The diamond is the final outcome of his empire, making it the final utcome of our lives. How can you measure the carats on thi diamond, how can we measure our lives worth? To answer this we need to know in what does Marco believe our live is made up, and since the empire is our lives and the empire is made of cities then cities must be the measuring scale. Not amount of cities but what they contain, I said cities in the work described feelings but feelings come from experiences. Do we measure our lives by experiences? On how much and how strong feelings are felt, not on what we get materially or socially but actually internally? Do we measure our live's value based on how we feel about ourselves or how other people feel about us? Naive of me to think my existencial unrest was going to simmer down after Selfish Gene.
domingo, 3 de junio de 2012
Calvino Chaos and "Golden Age" Syndrome
The psycho-scientific principle of chaotic thinking and linear thinking is often used to psychologically explain the space time contininuum. The theory states that time is not linear as we percieve it to be (past, then present, then future) but actually simultaneous (all "times" as one), this very much like how the alien race percieved time in Slaghter-House Five. The psychological explanation lies on the basis of chaotic thinking, a kind of rationalism that lies in our subconcious, too complex for our punny concious part, much like Calvino's story telling. If you are asked how a particular diamond was formed you will probably say it was made because of pressure of some minerals over time, this is an example of linear thinking. This opposed to chaotic thinking whitch would answer the diamond question by starting with the big bang, since chaotic thinking will arugue that the diamond was made from those minerals but those minerls where fused because a T-Rex fell on that spot above those minerals, at the same time it would argue about a tree that split a wave of air that caused those minerals to float to the same place, at the same time it woud argue that that tree grew there because a bird pooped the see right at that spot, and so on until it would narrow down to the clash between matter and anti-matter. This as you see is complete chaos and no matter how far we take it we will nevr uncover every path to answer the question. This is very much like Calvino's story telling, it is so overwhelming that we have to settle for one way of interpretation and one order of reading or be doomed in over analysis and a metaliterature overdose.
As the cinephile that I consider myself to be, I always make a movie oriented connection to almost everything I read, see, or hear, my previous blog is a proof. The "Golden Age" Syndrome is from the movie Midnight in Paris directed by Woody Allan. This is basically discribed in the museum of the city Fedora whitch bases itself on this theory. However it goes to only such an extent because of our linear way of thinking, if it were chaotic the museam would be filled to infinity with almost exact replicas with microscopical changes. Getting back on track, this syndrome is a specimen that needs chaotic thinking for an explanation. This syndrome continiously percieve the past as better but that is just the linear explanation. Since the space-time continiuum states time is not linear then where would this ideal "golden age" be if theres no past? The answer does not rest on time now, it has shifted to human behavior. Human inconformity is a constant "golden age" syndrome that would be erased and we could see our future so much clearer if we could comprehend chaotic thinking. However that not right because we wouldnt see our future at all because of the space time continiuum that now applies since we now understand chaotic thinking. Whaaaaaaat?
As the cinephile that I consider myself to be, I always make a movie oriented connection to almost everything I read, see, or hear, my previous blog is a proof. The "Golden Age" Syndrome is from the movie Midnight in Paris directed by Woody Allan. This is basically discribed in the museum of the city Fedora whitch bases itself on this theory. However it goes to only such an extent because of our linear way of thinking, if it were chaotic the museam would be filled to infinity with almost exact replicas with microscopical changes. Getting back on track, this syndrome is a specimen that needs chaotic thinking for an explanation. This syndrome continiously percieve the past as better but that is just the linear explanation. Since the space-time continiuum states time is not linear then where would this ideal "golden age" be if theres no past? The answer does not rest on time now, it has shifted to human behavior. Human inconformity is a constant "golden age" syndrome that would be erased and we could see our future so much clearer if we could comprehend chaotic thinking. However that not right because we wouldnt see our future at all because of the space time continiuum that now applies since we now understand chaotic thinking. Whaaaaaaat?
A Capsule of Memories
From your block to your street to your favorite pizza place, your city is a part of you. You leave memories and history in it, if you built it it has your seal, your heritage. It's the manifestation of your ideas, you interpret it and remember it as uniquely as the next person. It is your city.
Even though Bogota is Bogota, its a different city for me than it is to some one who lives in Kennedy or the Mayor. This is because in a way our cities work very similar our subconcious in relation to dreams, as interpreted by Freud and in a more simplistic way, by Inception. When you're dreaming it is almost empty aside from a general undetailed infraestructure. When you come into the dream, however, you start to fill it up with your subconcious, every last miniscule detail contains a part of you, memory, an experience. This is visible when you wake up from a dream that it is easy to remember detail but bigger things not so much. What I mean with this analogy s that cities are also filled up with your interpretation, people might not see the hand print on the side walk that ou did when th cement was fresh, but you do, you remember and that makes you reminice of other stuff that other people dont know about.Even culturally this is inmense the perfect example is New York City. China Town, Korea Town, Little Italy and even "Pequena Colombia", are all places filled with specigic cultural aspects.
Cities have this effect on everyone, however, it may also have a backlash. Some cities that do not thrive in multi-cultural aspects tend to shut down. These cities disable this symbolic "storage" mechanism and do the oposit. The cities already have a defined version that as you start to fill it up with your own personal manifestations it starts to kill them like a virus. As this happens you start to receive the cities already formed concensus.
As all this may be so the common thing is a grey area between both the cities effects. Anthropology acctually studies this manifestation in cities, well ancient ones. So much can be told culturally from a city. It can translate or show a way of living, religion, language, law, politics, etc. Cities can influence you greatly, and you can influence it as well some more than other but still, your city is a part of you as much as you are a part of it.
Even though Bogota is Bogota, its a different city for me than it is to some one who lives in Kennedy or the Mayor. This is because in a way our cities work very similar our subconcious in relation to dreams, as interpreted by Freud and in a more simplistic way, by Inception. When you're dreaming it is almost empty aside from a general undetailed infraestructure. When you come into the dream, however, you start to fill it up with your subconcious, every last miniscule detail contains a part of you, memory, an experience. This is visible when you wake up from a dream that it is easy to remember detail but bigger things not so much. What I mean with this analogy s that cities are also filled up with your interpretation, people might not see the hand print on the side walk that ou did when th cement was fresh, but you do, you remember and that makes you reminice of other stuff that other people dont know about.Even culturally this is inmense the perfect example is New York City. China Town, Korea Town, Little Italy and even "Pequena Colombia", are all places filled with specigic cultural aspects.
Cities have this effect on everyone, however, it may also have a backlash. Some cities that do not thrive in multi-cultural aspects tend to shut down. These cities disable this symbolic "storage" mechanism and do the oposit. The cities already have a defined version that as you start to fill it up with your own personal manifestations it starts to kill them like a virus. As this happens you start to receive the cities already formed concensus.
As all this may be so the common thing is a grey area between both the cities effects. Anthropology acctually studies this manifestation in cities, well ancient ones. So much can be told culturally from a city. It can translate or show a way of living, religion, language, law, politics, etc. Cities can influence you greatly, and you can influence it as well some more than other but still, your city is a part of you as much as you are a part of it.
martes, 15 de mayo de 2012
How Selfish of You to be Nice
If genes purpose is to survive and create survival machines then why woud it create altuiristic machines as well? Well, they don't, altuirism is against the gene's purpose and therefore against nature's purpose. Then why are some animals altuiristic, they are not. As explained in the "cave" theory and in the "never brake lines" theory, behavior that may seem altuiristic is acctually selfish, it just creates some colateral damge that seems to help others. We absolutelly never help others just because of the sake of helping, even volunteer charity work is selfish, we do it for many selfish reasons, maybe because of social pressure, or to feel good about ourselves or to make us feel better than others, or many reasons that we end up focusing on ourselves and our needs. We need people to be selfish, you cant be selfish on your own, it wont make a difference, as much as you cant be altuiristic on your own. Thats were the "Prisoner's Dilema" game comes in.
Tit for Tat vs. Tit for Tat was the winning strategy and it fits perfectly with my logic, in Tit for tat both players won points by helping out each other, not as much points as they could win by taking advantage of the other, but they won a good accumulative amount. This may seem as alturistic behavior but it is acctually done because its the best outcome for the player. Since the point of the game is not to see who has more points but to have many points then thi was the best winning strategy for you, you, not the other person, you! You chose this strategy so you would have many points, not for your opponent to have many points as well.
There are no alturistic beings, they would be the first ones to get screwed over and the first ones to die. This is certain, however this does not eliminate alturism from the survival equation. Alturistic behavior is a very benefitial attitude for survival however it can only work if its done out of the most self-centered, selfish intentions.
Tit for Tat vs. Tit for Tat was the winning strategy and it fits perfectly with my logic, in Tit for tat both players won points by helping out each other, not as much points as they could win by taking advantage of the other, but they won a good accumulative amount. This may seem as alturistic behavior but it is acctually done because its the best outcome for the player. Since the point of the game is not to see who has more points but to have many points then thi was the best winning strategy for you, you, not the other person, you! You chose this strategy so you would have many points, not for your opponent to have many points as well.
There are no alturistic beings, they would be the first ones to get screwed over and the first ones to die. This is certain, however this does not eliminate alturism from the survival equation. Alturistic behavior is a very benefitial attitude for survival however it can only work if its done out of the most self-centered, selfish intentions.
In Genes We Trust
In many ways God is like Genes, I dont believe in God but from what I've heard He is a direct translation, in over simplistic but logical terms, to genes. I will right this pretending I believe because if I right it as an atheist then it woud be a blog about genes, not God and genes. Genes define us, they decide if we have blue or green eyes, if we are tall or small, they have even discused that it defines are sexual inclination. God did the same thing, apparently he made us all out of clay and sculpted us carefully, he defined us and even set a purpose for us in life. Genes also set a purpose for us, they created us and defined us so we would mantain their longevity. It is said that we chose to spread the word of God and perpetuate his "life" by preaching and shoving it down other people's mouth, but if God predetermined our lives from the get go then he is doing this himself. God as well as genes are bigger that us, they are part of a much important and bigger picture and because of this they use us but thats just the way we fit in this bigger picture.
One of the questions that arose when I decided to drop my faith was: if God doesn't exist then why was he invented? Well if God and Genes are so alike and we found out about God first then our discovery of them must have originated from the same curiosity and question. Why are we here? Why do we exist? These questions are so overwhelming that we would do anything to stop the from eating us alive, even if it means blindingly following three letters that together rhyme with "gob". The God we made is a perfect answer to a problem, however it has no data to back it up but who cares, we are only trying to convince ourselves, and we dont need facts for that. This is the point were genes step into the picture and I have to put my foot down and say what the frog. Genes tell us why we are here, who we are and why we are good for, what else do you want? There answer is not very encouraging since they pretty much tell us we are vessels for their continuity, just like the poor hostages of Alien. Even though they don't give us an inpiring, divine answer to our question, they acctually answer it, with facts!
Even though I could keep on plastering my frustration, I musn't. Im afraid I have gone completely off topic with this blog however the explanation lies on the chapter, it was way to scientific and as ignorant as that sounds, I found it really hard to expand on, so I chose the easy way out and talked about religion, a topic that I could talk about until I get kicked out of a church.
One of the questions that arose when I decided to drop my faith was: if God doesn't exist then why was he invented? Well if God and Genes are so alike and we found out about God first then our discovery of them must have originated from the same curiosity and question. Why are we here? Why do we exist? These questions are so overwhelming that we would do anything to stop the from eating us alive, even if it means blindingly following three letters that together rhyme with "gob". The God we made is a perfect answer to a problem, however it has no data to back it up but who cares, we are only trying to convince ourselves, and we dont need facts for that. This is the point were genes step into the picture and I have to put my foot down and say what the frog. Genes tell us why we are here, who we are and why we are good for, what else do you want? There answer is not very encouraging since they pretty much tell us we are vessels for their continuity, just like the poor hostages of Alien. Even though they don't give us an inpiring, divine answer to our question, they acctually answer it, with facts!
Even though I could keep on plastering my frustration, I musn't. Im afraid I have gone completely off topic with this blog however the explanation lies on the chapter, it was way to scientific and as ignorant as that sounds, I found it really hard to expand on, so I chose the easy way out and talked about religion, a topic that I could talk about until I get kicked out of a church.
Suscribirse a:
Comentarios (Atom)