Invisible Words

Ephemeral (Pg. 111)

Adjective. Short Lived, Lasting a very short time

Carats (Pg. 112) 

Noun. A unit of weight for gemstones, 1 Carat = 200 milligrams

Opulence (Pg. 114)

Noun. Wealth, Riches abundance

Gulley or Gully (Pg. 124) 

Noun. Channel or small valley

Concentric (Pg. 129) 
Adjective. That has a common center as in spirals and spheres. 

Benevolent(Pg. 135) 

Adjective. Desire of helping others, expressing goodwill and kindness

Medlars (Pg. 146)
Noun. a small tree, of the rose family. Its fruit resembles a crab apple. 























Mangy (Pg. 153)
Adjective. squalid, shabby, mean 

Menace ( Pg. 164) 
Noun. something or someone who is considered a threat (Harmful, injury, evil or dangerous). An extremely annoying person.

Titles and Cities

In class we had discussed on how similar yet different all the cities named in Invisible Cities were. Physically and visually they were quite different. However, if the book was read according to sections, by this I mean reading all the five sections of "Cities and Memory" and then all the five sections of "Cities and Desire" amongst others, we would be able to find that the cities were all quite similar.

In order to truly understand the book we have to interpret it in a simbolic way, by this meaning in a non literal form. If this is true, then the figurative meaning of the cities would be the knowledge that is out there in the world. Having this hypothesis in mind I started searching for similarities in between the cities, and those   that belonged in each section. For instance, in "Cities and The Dead" 2, " On the dock the sailor who caught the rope and tied it to the bollard resembled a man who had soldiered with me and was dead...The girl was identical with one in my village who had gone mad for love and killed herself" (Pg. 94) or for example in "Cities and The Dead 5", "It is the Laudomia of the dead, the cemetery. But Laudomia's special faculty is that of being not only double, but triple; it comprehends, in short, a third Laudomia, the city of the unborn." 

It can be seen that in both cases the author is speaking about cities who have the same characteristics, those who relate to death, or in "Cities and Desire" those related to human desire etc. Basically this all sums up to the fact that in the end, knowledge is different and though some can to be very similar it is never quite the same. Knowledge comes in different sizes and doses, never being completely identical.

Patterns.

As we started reading, Invisible Cities by Italo Calvino, I began finding different patterns. These different designs I found were all somewhat related to the cities narrated by Marco Polo. They all had to do with them in a way or another, literally or figuratively. Even so, at the beginning of the book, Calvino writes, “Only in Marco Polo’s accounts was Kublai Khan able to discern, through the wall and towers destined to crumble, the tracery of a pattern so subtle it could escape the termites’ gnawing.”  (Pg. 6) Thus, telling Kublai Khan, (or the reader if understood in a more symbolic way) that only in what Marco Polo says (or the writer) is Khan able to discover through knowledge a patter so delicate but complex, it could escape the enemy (meaning the forgetfulness of knowledge).

Although this book can be read in different ways it can only be comprehended in two different ways, one figurative and one literal. However, slight patterns can still be traced.

Pattern 1:

If the reader checks the index carefully, it will reveal a peculiar sequence in the progression of tittles and numbers. The reader would be able to notice how a succession follows an organized sequence (54321) In the first section, the numbers all start at 1, increase and then decrease back to number one. Consequently, through the rest of the sections all the titles follow the order (54321), expect the last one. Number nine, is the inverse or the contrary of the first section, beginning at five, decreasing and then increasing back again to five.

Pattern 2:

I didn’t notice this pattern, but rather a friend told me about it, and it was quite interesting. In the index, the reader can see how the tittles of each new chapter, or section vary in length, making a wave. Meaning, that if looked sideways, and all next to the other, it could look like a city skyline.

These are only two of the many patterns that can be seen in the book. They didn’t just happen to be there. They were intentionally put there for a reason that still remains unknown to us.

Dante Alighieri Vs. Kublai Khan

Since we started reading this book, people have said nothing more common than that the book have a allusion to The Divine Comedy: Inferno, colloquially called Dante's Inferno. I really had to think about it to finally understand the connection between these two works.

"At this point Kublai Khan interrupted him or imagined interrupting him, or Marco Polo imagined himself being interrupted, with a question such as: "You advance always with your head turned back?" or "Is what you always see behind you?" or rather, "Does your journey take place only in the past?" (Pg. 28) This quote makes a subtle and light reference to the fourth Bolgia in the eight circle of hell where all the astrologers, prophets and sorcerers are found. They are found paying their sins in that way, because as in the mortal life they tried to foresee the future, they can now only see their past.

Both Khan and Dante are found in a situation in which they are finding more about themselves, guided by   someone, in Khan's case it is Marco Polo and in Dante's place it is Virgil. While in Invisible Cities Calvino explains how the human mind functions and how memories, desires and knowledge can affect the paths we take in life. Whereas in Dante's Inferno, Dante explains to the reader the long run consequences of the choices we make in life.

In both cases, they authors write on how important our past is regarding our future. They talk on how the past affects our future, and vice versa. While Calvino explains to the reader how our future can affect the way we view our past, Dante writes on how our past might potentially affect our future. Making them a continuous cycle. 

Are They Inside?

Through the beginning of the book Invisible Cities, by Italo Calvino different thoughts started forming and merging in my mind. In class earlier we had discussed about a more figurative meaning about what the book and the story actually meant. It all led me to think if in fact the cities described by Marco Polo were not only different kinds of knowledge, but they ment something more too.

The book can be seen and understood in a figurative way, and thus the reader can truly understand the meaning of it. Calvino explores imagination and the imaginable through the descriptions of cities by Marco Polo. Not only can the reader understand that somehow all the cities are connected (by purely human characteristics)but also how everything is interconnected. Many of the titles of the sections, for example, describe the cities with human features.  "Cities and Memory" "Cities and Desire" "Cities and the dead" etc. Furthermore, what Marco Polo describes in the cities can be interpreted as plain human characteristics, are they memories, desires, greed, or with human qualities like being tempting artistic, or subtle. 

This all leads to the proof that somehow, all the cities resemble humans, and if interpreted in a more symbolic way, cities are all the knowledge that is out there that we store in our minds, thus making the cities a part of our mind. 

"Nice Guys Finish First."

In this chapter, Dawkins introduces the The  Prisoner’s Dilemma Game. This is a game based on on one turn, you can choose to either cooperate or to defect, and the option your opponent choses, plus what you chose defines the results. This game can be used as a tool to reveal how even if the genes inside survival machines have the instinct to be selfish, they are also endowed with a nice behavior, a cooperative side inside them.  To prove his point Dawkins provides the reader with different strategies into whether being nice is better or being selfish is better, and so, what do you think is better? Selfishness or kindness?


Through the course of the book, Dawkins has constantly reminded us on how our genes are selfish, and they only seek for their internal good in order to survive, unconsciously off course. We've seen how replicators rely on other survival machines and take advantage on the opportunity of being in herds, only to benefit themselves from that. However, in this chapter, the completely opposite thing is shown. In this game, which can apply to many different situations in life, like sharing food or doing  people favors that are repaid later, being nice ends up being the better option. So choose to be good or bad? The latter is the wrong choice, to choose being greedy in this game won't suffice your desires.  And so being the nice is better for you, giving everything an unexpected twist. And thus, proving the fact that underneath all those layers of selfishness, there is something good after all. Leaving the question to ponder on, are we, survival machines, then so robotically selfish after all?  Are we so terribly selfish after all? 

Abstract Replicators?

Through the course of time different kinds of replicators have started to develop, but only on the human body, making us different than other survival machines. Culture has made us different, and has, metaphorically, taken the form of a primeval soup, similar to the one that created replicators. And thus, a special kind of replicator, unique to humans, has developed in our brain, and is commonly called as a meme. The word meme can be defined as "an idea, behavior, style, or usage that spreads from person to person within a culture." This kind of replicator not gene, is different from the rest, however it still possesses the same characteristics as the rest: longevity, fecundity, and copying fidelity. 

Memes are not genes, they are not physical, but they are rather abstract, and obviously the replicate in different ways."Just as genes propagare themselves in the gene pool by leaping from body to body via sperms or eggs, so memes propagate themselves in the meme pool by leaping from brain to brain via a process which, in the broad sense can be called imitation" (Pg. 192) Memes have a sense of survival, just like genes. Memes also tend to compete against each other for attention, popularity and time. A meme's success can measured on how society perceives it, whether if its popular or not. The more popular, the higher chances of surviving it has. 

"When we die there are two things we can leave behind us genes and memes."(p. 199) Our genes will be passed on to many generations through our blood, having an impact on our descendants. However, as generations pass by, we start to fade. On the other hand, memes do not disappear through time, they just adapt and change. Memes have the possibility of outliving our gene combination and the memory others have of us. Memes that have an impact on society can live to be very old, even immortal, they can change and adapt as time passes, but they still wont die.  


Genes are not designed nor were created to be immortal, that through time they have become immortal is different. Genes, are prone to change because time brings change, in other words evolution. However, memes,  can last to live for a longer time than genes. They will not be exactly the same as they were at the beginning, since ideas change to fit in depending on the time and place, but their original essence will remain through many generations, and so revealing the replicators immortality. 

Subconscious Interests

Through all our life we have been taught on how animals depend on each other, and thus they remain together maintaining flocks, herds and packs. For instance, bees have to work together in order to survive. They have to coexist and many animals have symbiotic relationships that allows them to survive. "The suggested benefits that a selfish individual can wrest from living in a group constitute rather a miscellaneous list." (Pg. 10) However, animals do not just live in flocks of the same species to benefit themselves in different selfish ways as Dawkins explains, consequently allowing them to spread and conserve their own genes. This has a bigger meaning, and it is much bigger than just selfishness between the same species. This kind of selfishness comes way back to the beginning of the world, between interspecies there are connections too. 

Symbiosis: (noun)  A relationship of mutual benefit or dependence.

Many animals live in groups that their genes believe will benefit them in different ways. Genes are selfish, and they only think upon their own interests, not thinking in those of the rest. However, there are some species, and again using the bees as an example, are social insects. "Their individuality is subjugated, apparently to the welfare of the community" (Pg. 171) If they want food, they have to work together. That's the key to their survival, bees are not selfish at all, they have to share in order to survive, and that is their genes goal. Not only this social insects are not selfish, but the symbiosis that exists between different species depicts a different kind of selfishness, that of "by helping you, I'm helping me survive, because if I don't help you, I don't survive". For instance, plants and insects (bees and butterflies) depend on each other, or clown fish and sea anemones, without the other, they both die. 


This leaves the question if organisms are really that selfish or they're just being overrated. We have to live in a community, not only between those of our same species, but of others too if we want to live and survive in this planet. Which means that we cannot be that selfish as they say we are, as we have to not be selfish in order to survive. 

The Eternal Genes, The Disposable Humans

From my previous understanding on the argument of The Selfish Gene, animals and plants alike are plain survival machines. We are survival machines replicators have created in order for them to survive the harsh competition they face on earth, and so they have developed to create armors, becoming genes in the process and live inside us to protect themselves. "Individuals are not stable things, they are always fleeting...When we have served our purposes we are cast aside. But genes are denizens of geological time: genes are forever" (Pg. 35)

We live in the replicator's battle arena, or if you would like to call it, game. We are their playing cards, discarded and replaced, discarded and replaced, over an over again. It's a cycle, for a battle that will never end. Genes have come to be eternal, we are the mortals, whereas genes are the immortals. We are on trial battling others, but at the same time proving our efficiency. "We are all survival machines for the same kind of replicator-molecules called DNA-but there are many different ways of making a living in the world, and the replicators have built a vast range of machines to exploit them" (Pg 21) There are different arenas, the sea, which has survival machines designed for life in the water like fish, just like monkeys are survival machines designed for life in the forest. Each organism, is it a plant, an animal or even a virus are all made of the same kind of molecule, DNA, which is composed of genes, or as known before, replicators. 

Genes have come to become so small, and have so many descendants that it is virtually impossible nowadays for a gene to die. It is eternal. "Genes, like diamond, are forever, but not quite in the same way as diamonds." (Pg. 35) However, we, their robots are disposable in their never ending  ingenious game called evolution. Those who survive win, and those who die, simply loose. But those who are already imagining genes as jigsaw killer from saw, are just completely off. Genes do not think, they don't plan ahead, and they don't enjoy this game. Just as cells don't think but only divide, genes only survive, sometimes committing small mistakes that make everything change, or evolve. In the end everything is much worse, because we are living in a cycle, that no one can stop, not even their creators, the replicators, because they, they are long dead. 

The Unwanted Mistake

“You are not special. You are not a beautiful or unique snowflake. You are the same decaying organic matter as everything else.” - Anonymous


While reading the The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins, it made me develop questions that questioned life and its meaning. What if the replicators hadn't made any mistakes? How would things would be different? Would humans even exist? What are actually we designed to do? What's the truth behind all of that? We will never know. 

“Evolution is something that happens, willy-nilly, in spite of all the efforts of the replicators (and nowadays of the genes) to prevent it from happening.” (Pg. 18) We just happened, God didn't create us in seven days. We began as a mistake, and we are a mistake, that is something we cannot change. We just happened. Humans are survival machines, we are the replicators protection against death. "Replicators began not merely to exist, but to construct for themselves containers, vehicles for their continued existence. The replicators that survived were the ones that built survival machines  for themselves to live in." (Pg. 19) We don't have a different goal in life, but to survive. That's what we were made to do. We only live once, so we should take care of ourselves to live the longest and ensure the survival of our genes and thereby the survival of our species through our descendants. 

Here is where the survival of the fittest theory comes into the picture. Only the fittest, and consequently only the superior ones survive, cleaning the race from any impurities. Humans, just as animals are the  armor replicators have designed in order for the fittest to win. It's not only a race between replicators but between species.By now, it seems like humans are winning the race between specie. Even if we try to paint reality with different colors and stories of how we are destined to love and be happy, science does not lie. We have to embrace the fact of who we are, and what we are destined to do: Fight each other. Be selfish, that is what our anatomy shouts at us, fight others in order to let our race survive, and don't be weak, because the weak die and we shouldn't die.  

Dawkins  crudely reveals to us in a hidden, but simple and straightforward way that we are just plain machines designed to pass on and protect genes. That's our reality and that's just the way things are. Even if we try to hide from it, in the end we all know who we are: Survival machines. 

The New King

Log Entry: MacBeth
III.vi. 1- 57

Perfect, but Unachievable

Who wouldn't like a flawless world were there is perfect balance on every aspect of society? Who wouldn't want to live somewhere where everything and everyone is equal, and there is only good and no bad? On everyone's deepest desires this dream falls upon, however it is only dream, nothing more. No thing such thing as perfection exists, it will always remain as an aspiration, but never a reality. Perfection, in any way is something impossible to achieve.

Eldorado seems to be the ideal society: The utopia we've all dreamed of. It is amazing how such place could be found, however it is all but a mere reality, it is nothing more than pure fiction. "We are all of the same opinions here" (Pg. 80) Until the day of today, most of the global issues happening all around the world are caused because  of dissenting views. People are always disputing on who is right or wrong. Virtually everything on earth has dissenting views, is it from global warming to the theory of the dinosaurs extinction. It is impossible for everyone to agree of everything, that's just not the way things are and it will never be like that. Moreover, Voltaire exhibits this place as hidden from everything, almost impossible to reach. "The mountains which surround my entire kingdom are then thousand feet high, and as sheer as wall. Each of them covers an area  of more than thirty square mils, and when you reach the top, you can only clamber down precipices." (Pg. 83) Which in others words, can be translated to an allegory to the impossible. Such place is impossible to reach, therefore it doesn't exist, it can only exist in our imagination. 

Eldorado doesn't exist, and Voltaire clearly knew that. He shows and portrays el Eldorado that way, in order for to his readers to see the perfect, but unattainable society. He exhibits what we must strive for, but through the book demonstrates that we will never achieve that, much less perfection, as our nature doesn't allow us to. 

The Poor Village

On earth there are luxurious places, and there are wretched places. Power is always unevenly distributed.  Either a place is very powerful or it is very miserable, but there is never complete equality. Through time we have learned that the human race is a very greedy and selfish one, only thinking on their personal good. 

It is amazing how we can find places where treasures are wasted on decorations, moreover treated as unworthy and common, when they could be used to help other's despair. “They walked over to a modest little house…the door was mere silver, and the rooms were panelled with nothing better than gold… The hall was incrusted only with rubies and emeralds…extreme simplicity” (Pg. 78) In places such as America and Africa, were nowadays many countries suffer from extreme poverty and in many cases severe internal problems. Which were all caused by their history, all based upon colonization. Most of the problems these third world countries face revolve around the fact that their people and basically everything their lands had to offer was exploited and stolen. It is all centered on cause and effect. During this time, while some in the new world enjoyed the delights of wealthiness,  even offering visitors “liqueurs in diamond glasses” (Pg. 78) many of the native inhabitants suffered as slaves, the pleasures that poverty had to offer them. However, there were places like Eldorado were the human race wasn't greedy at all, but still wasted huge opportunities by having in their possession all that wealth, but not using it to help others in need. 

Why do we  mostly waste the opportunities we have to give some of our own wealth to help others succeed? Oh right, because we are too selfish to do so. Through the course of Candide, I have realized that the only thing that Voltaire portrays humans as, is as crude, terrifying creatures that live in an unfair tremendously horrid planet, and he never gets tired of repeating the same thing, over and over again as to make his point extremely evident to the reader.

The Best of All Possible Worlds

Our world is unfair. Our world doesn't always respond the way we want to. Many times unexpected and cruel things happen to good people who do not deserve it. The world is all but predictable. We can protect and prevent disasters or diseases, but we never know who will die everyday, at least not until it happens. People are still going to die. However, who is there to blame? Who is the one who makes planet earth so unfair?  On earth, we can find two things, those we can control and conquer, and those we cannot control or conquer. 

The ironic part of Candide is that not "everything is for the best in this world of ours" (Pg. 27) and we don't live in "the best of all possible worlds."(Pg. 20)  Yet, we are the ones responsible for making our world a horrible place. Many people live miserably, why do you think people commit suicide each day?  The answer is very simple."I have met a vast number of people who detested their existence" (Pg. 57) 

We are the ones who make our world unfair. Ana Maria Villaveces, wrote in her blog, "As a species, we tend to want equality but still hope the best is given to us, we enjoy as other people suffer as long as this doesn’t affect the way we live." We are ambitious and cruel creatures making our world that way, we do not care about what happens to others, just to us. That’s one of the reasons our world is that way, because we are selfish, only seeking for personal pleasure. People only sit down and wines about how horrible their life has been, but never realize what took there. "He did not dare to say he was his wife because in fact she was not. He did not dare to say she was his sister, because that was not true either...his soul was too pure to commit such treason against truth" (Pg. 59) Candide only had a drop bad luck, he is an innocent and virtuous person who honestly didn't deserve to go through so much trouble. The same goes to James, Dr. Pagloss, Lady Cunégonde, or the Old Lady, all good people. 

Our world isn't atrocious. We make it that way, which is what seems to be portrayed in a satirical manner in Candide. People can suffer from incidents caused by nature, but there is no one to blame. It’s no one's fault that those things happen. We cannot control some things, and that's just life. 

"O Che Sciagura D'essere Senza Coglioni!"

Who is there to speak about the crude truth of war? Who is there with a strong voice to speak about it? Not many alive can ever speak of this, because no one will ever know what it is like.  Only those who have lived it, can talk about it. War is a crude topic, it reveals mens true ambitions and desires. It exemplifies men as a ravishing but blood and gold thirsted creature, it shows men's true and dark side.

"They fought like lions, tigers and serpents of their country to decide who should have us...Almost all our women were immediately disputed in the same fashion by four soldiers a piece..In the end I saw my mother and all our Italian ladies torn limb from limb, then slashed, and massacred by the monsters that fought for them. All were killed, both captors and captives, my companions, the soldiers, sailors, blacks, whites, and mulattoes, and finally my pirate chief; and I myself lay dying on a heap of corpses...Scene such as these took place all over that country..."(Pg. 52)

After a scenery such as that, after one has lost everything, pride included, the question of  why should one live arises. What would be the reason to keep on living a precarious life, one full of uncertainties and tormet, not knowing if one shall live the day after. Why live if there is nothing to loose because everything has already been lost? That, are the questions without answers that war makes, war makes people suffer, even if it is for a good cause, war is a selfish act were people let many others die and  let their lives be destroyed for ones own pleasure.

"I have grown old (with only half a behind) in misery and shame but I have never forgotten that I am the daughter of a Pope. I have wanted to kill myself a hundred times, but somehow I am still in love with life...I have met  a vast number of people who detested their existence, but I have met only twelve who have voluntarily put an end to their misery..."  (Pg. 57)   Not unexpected, Candide surprises the reader once more. By being a satirical novel one would think that this book would be the contrary of good and optimistic, as its ironic title implies, but instead it is a story about misery, loss and suffering, in which their characters are the contrary of pessimistic in those situations,  when they should be, but are rather positive and hopeful.