Eternity Lasts and Instant: Invisible Cities, by Italo Calvino, Chapters IV-VI

People’s lives are comprised of a variety of moments and experiences that are cumulatively added together in order engender an existence. An illusion of time is created in order to satisfy man’s urge to dominate the universe; however, life’s paradoxical character makes eternity an instant. Italo Calvino’s book Invisible Cities, as well as the film Waking Life, present various schemes that develop in different contexts and indicate how a single moment can comprise the universe’s endless diversity and indisputable truths.
“Not the labile mists of memory nor the dry transparence, but the charring of burned lives that forms a scab on the city, the sponge swollen with vital matter that no longer flows, the jam of past, present, future that blocks existences calcified in the illusion of movement: this is what you would find at the end of your journey.” (Calvino, p. 99).
As the previous quote explains, memory is subject to change every time a new experience is encountered. The perspective one possesses on existence itself is altered every instant by both the actions and emotions one commits or fails to execute. Transparence may symbolize the air itself, dry and impalpable. Even though some may argue that the concept of a “dry transparence” is too vague to be analyzed, this symbol defines reality in the same sense memories give meaning to the past and present existence: air is the medium through which the self is able to perceive that which surrounds him. Ironically, human beings themselves act as the mist that bars the mind and body, like a scab or a sponge, from achieving a complete understanding of existentialist thought. It is important to notice how the author refers to time as “jammed,” meaning that the past, present, and future all converge in order to form one sole unit. Movement, as is explained by the quote, is merely an “illusion,” a creation enacted by the human mind in order to provide explanations and perpetrate mankind’s dominion of nature. The “end of your journey,” or the culmination of life, gives way to an intricate yet infinite state unknown to any individual inhabiting the planet. It is then when one realizes that existence, now complete after one’s permanence on Earth has been terminated, is not a compilation of events that have taken place over a period of time, but rather one sole instant contained together for infinity. Like the man in the arcade in the movie Waking Life said, “time is an illusion – we live in an instant: eternity.” (Waking Life).

Both Invisible Cities and Heart of Darkness discuss the contrasting characteristics of light and darkness. Although Conrad’s novel does so in a more explicit manner, Calvino is able to perceive human feelings through a figurative definition of the concepts stated above. “If you want to know how much darkness there is around you, you must sharpen your eyes, peering at the faint lights in the distance.” (Calvino, p. 59). This passage poses a contradiction in the sense that in order for someone to be aware of the darkness that surrounds them, the person must be able to scrutinize the “faint lights in the distance.” Like the Judeo-Christian Bible, a comparison between opposite elements needs to be established in order to provide a clear definition of each of these aspects. Figuratively, the “faint lights” in this quote represent those individuals who are good in essence. Once one has had a glimpse of them, other people will seem more evil by comparison. It is important to emphasize that darkness abounds but that light is scarce; consequently, one can infer that the forces of evil dominate our daily lives, but that these are so common that one is barely able to notice them.

Heart of Darkness provides a wide variety of instances where darkness is mentioned. All of these refer to the jungle, or the place where Kurtz employed his brutal and evil methods in order to obtain the ivory that was bound to satisfy his worldly desires. “I saw him extend his short flipper of an arm for a gesture that took in the forest, the creek, the mud, the river,- seemed to beckon with a dishonoring flourish before the sunlit face of the land a treacherous appeal to the lurking death, to the hidden evil, to the profound darkness of its heart.” (p. 59). Darkness extends throughout the vast magnitude of the Earth, making it contrast sharply with the land’s “sunlit face,” which the absence of light seems to irrevocably overwhelm. The “lurking death” and “hidden evil” invade the heart of darkness, or the jungle itself. The fact that it is “lurking” and “hidden” makes it much more treacherous and dangerous. Although Calvino uses darkness to define human conduct and Conrad utilized this concept in order to provide an explanation for its boundless influence, both of them cohere in the sense that evil remains hidden and unseen, yet possesses a universal influence.

Existentialism and the Relevance of Time: Invisible Cities, by Italo Calvino, Chapters I-III

Invisible Cities is a book about the conceptualization of desires and the role of perceptions in determining human thought and opinion. Due to its independent, random, and detached character, the text can be easily associated to the staccato of scenes in the film Waking Life. Both of these works treat with a separate aspect of existentialism, whether it be human lives themselves or the manifestation of the self in the place one inhabits. An aspect that caught my attention in both Waking Life and Invisible Cities is the importance that is attributed to time. For one part, every moment is relevant in determining the course of one’s life and the pattern of existence as a whole. “To say yes to one instant is to say yes to all of existence.” (Waking Life). As Robert Frost’s poem “The Road Not Taken” says, it is the paths each individual decides to take what makes “all the difference” in the future course of events. Existence can be considered as a sole unit in the sense that every one of its components, experiences, can be regarded as equally necessary in the regulation of one’s present reality. This can be compared to the city of Zoe in Invisible Cities:
“The traveler roams all around and has nothing but doubts: he is unable to distinguish the features of the city, the features he keeps distinct in his mind also mingle. He infers this: if existence in all of its moments is all of itself, Zoe is the place of indivisible existence.” (Calvino, p. 34).
When considered from a figurative sense, the merging and fusing of the elements that compose the city of Zoe can be considered as the separate yet equally significant components of existence itself. A city, or the materialization of human life and thought, brings forth everything and everyone that has contributed to the formation of individual lives. Each unit intermingles and joins with all the rest in order to give way to a massive, intricate, and abstract reality. The features are indistinct because of the synthesis it has undergone; thus, one can infer that existence “is all of itself.” In other words, the separate instances contribute to the formation of the present as we know it. Every moment can be regarded as an entire existence because each event brings forth a series of chain reactions that have taken place in order to produce an “indivisible existence” such as Zoe. The relevance of time is perfectly clear when considering life’s perpetual and incessant transformations; consequently, it is able to encompass the complexity of the past and the variations of the present.

The distorted and somewhat surreal digital clock that appears in Waking Life conceals a double meaning that may lead to the debunking of my thesis; however, it is the irrelevance the film places on the scientific approach to life what highlights the importance of moments rather than measured time itself. Even though the passage of time cannot be accurately calculated, the existentialist experiences that the main character undergoes remain intact. Time is not halted but rather altered. The significance of instants and experiences overwhelm the human urge to control the universe. Science is replaced by the weight an existentialist point of view places in the individual actions that take place throughout the course of our lives and that continually characterize our realities.

Italo Calvino proceeds to incorporate the future as an equally important unit of existence by associating it with a discarded possibility from the past. He talks about how another person’s present could have been a part of our own lives if only we had chosen another path or done something different. (Calvino, p. 29). “Futures not achieved are only branches of the past: dead branches… ‘Elsewhere is a negative mirror. The traveler recognizes the little that is his, discovering the much he has not had and will never have.” (Calvino, 29). Marco Polo’s reply to this matter highlights the paradoxical importance non-action has when determining the course of events that will unfold later on in our lives. The contending elements of space, being and non-being, are equally significant when discussing our present. Our negative mirror, or everything that does not make part of ourselves, is barred from our reality and therefore excluded from existence itself. Each person’s reality encompasses everything that is, was, or simply never existed. We live life making the decisions that we think will determine our future, unaware of the fact that everything which is never carried out is equally important as the actions we commit.

The Vagueness of Human Thought: The Coast of Utopia, Voyage Act II

Are all philosophical doctrines true even if they are contradictory, or is there only one sole correct belief people must adhere to? Michael Bakunin, Nicholas Stankevich, and all the other young thinkers in the play The Coast of Utopia spent their entire existence searching for the proper ideology that was followed universally, ultimately arriving no place. “What you think is reality is nothing but the shadow thrown by the firelight on the wall of the cave.” (p. 66). At first, these individuals proclaimed reality to be inexistent. It was just a mere illusion of the mind, or the flames, that reflect their firelight, or way of thinking, on the wall of the cave, in this case the world itself. The product is a shadow or a false reality created by us. Like a shadow, it is vague, intangible, and inexistent.

This philosophy eventually gave way to that proclaimed by Fichte. “How do I know the world exists? I know it when a seagull shits on my head. The world achieves existence where I meet it. The Self is everything, it’s the only thing. At last a philosophy that makes sense!” (p. 90). Bakunin, Stankevich, and all the others abandoned their previous ideology, which at that time they fervently adhered to, and replaced it with Fichte’s beliefs. These completely contradicted the former philosophy in the sense that the world existed in a subjective sense. For example, a perfume’s essence may be to sweet for one person and to subtle for another one. Although their perspectives on the same matter may be different, the perfume is a reality for both individuals. The experiences one goes through present a clash of the exterior world with the privacy of the human mind. The footprint or mark of the human mind upon the world creates the Self, a tangible, factual, and physical reality. Most important is the contradictory attitudes the philosophers adopt about their previous way of thought, at first believed to be the only truth and later viewed as a senseless and absurd dogma that did not make sense.

Previously declared as the only “philosophy that makes sense,” Fichte’s doctrines eventually gave way to Hegel’s.
“Belinsky: So, the objective world is not an illusion after all?
Stankevich: No
Belinsky: The laundry, the blacksmith, everything that Fichte said was just the shapes left by the impress of my mind… is real?
Stankevich: Yes. Everything rational is real, and everything real is rational.” (p. 103).
A strict and objective universe in which reality was the same for everybody almost instantly replaced the subjective view of the world, where every individual had a different reality according to what their senses perceived. Different personalities and tastes did not affect what was real; thus, individuality was undermined and instead replaced with a stringent, unbendable view of the universe. The young philosophers contradicted their ideals once again. They did not merely abandon their previous points of view, but went so far as to proclaim them erroneous. “Fichte? You must read Hegel. Hegel is the man! Fichte tried to argue the subjective world out of existence. No wonder I was going wrong!” (p. 100).

Such disorder and change of ideals was bound to confuse everybody on what was the definite doctrine followed by the universe and reality itself. Even though the permanent change in ideals was meant to be an intricate search for the truth, it ended up undermining the entire concept of philosophy. No theory was correct because they would eventually succumb to the pattern discussed above and be replaced by a newer and fresher philosophy that appealed more to society. “Then what is the shadow on the wall of the cave? That’s philosophy.” (p. 104). The flames are not the human mind, but rather the universe itself. It is projected on our lives, or the wall of the cave, producing a shadow. The shadow, philosophy, is all the doubts, thoughts, and conceptual representations our individual minds have constructed. Like a shadow, they are the reflections of the exterior world upon our intellects; consequently, they are merely a reaction to external events, not the ultimate truth itself. They are simply a vague manifestation of out thoughts. The world does not follow a definite philosophy, but rather separate philosophies follow the different aspects of the universe and society.

Also significant is the meaning of the title to the overall development of the text. Political corruption and underdevelopment characterized the Russian government of the nineteenth century. Like in 1984, the authorities attempted to suppress any type of protest or revolt. “We have renounced our right to be the gaolers in a population of prisoners. There’s no air, no movement. Words become deeds. Thoughts are deeds. They’re punished more severely than ordinary crimes.” (p. 64). However, unlike 1984, the government failed to manipulate society and establish their own ideals among the people. The word “coast” in the title is relevant to this issue in the sense that the coast, or shore of a utopia, signifies only a vague intromission of the Romanov dynasty in the lives of the Russian people. The efforts to create a utopia stand on the sidelines of society. The standards for creating a perfect country had not yet implemented in Russia, but instead were on the border of this civilization, on the verge to break the barrier of the unhappiness and stubbornness of active political protesters like the ones introduced throughout the book. These, as the title of the section indicates, had embarked on a voyage to remedy society’s evils and oust the stalemate that, like in 1984, was believed to satisfy an ignorant mass of people who lived inside a fabricated utopia that still hadn’t managed to drown the whole of Russia.

A Truth Refuted by Science: The Coast of Utopia, Voyage Act I

Time goes by, but human behavior remains static. Days, weeks, months, and even years are completely irrelevant when determining the unchanging pattern followed by every individual. Even though man possesses a rational mind that leads to the creation of a wide variety of different philosophies one must adhere to, his overall conduct towards life in general is always the same. The first act of “Voyage” in Tom Stoppard’s play The Coast of Utopia takes place in exactly the same setting but is developed throughout an eight-year time period. The author selects excerpts that in some way prove to be relevant to the development of the plot, but fails to mention what happened between these time periods; consequently, it appears as if these had never taken place. Although the fragments narrated take place in different times, the characters conserve the same postures from the end of an interval to the beginning of the next. “Alexander and Liuvov are where they were, her head against his breast, his fingers searching her hair.” (p. 29). The scene that takes place at the end of autumn 1835 concludes with Liuvov resting against her father’s breast, which is exactly the same posture that inaugurates the following episode in the spring of 1836. This defines part of the form the play follows, which in turn modifies the context in order to show that time is irrelevant when talking about human conduct.

Man has been considered a rational being ever since the Greek philosophers began introducing their empirical views on human nature. The rise of modern science in the XVIIth century and the emergence of the scientific view of the world inaugurated a time period known as the Age of Reason. Both René Descartes and Francis Bacon addressed themselves to the problem of knowledge and advocated the use of a more reliable and truthful method to be able to understand the complexity of nature. Systematic reasoning influenced the thinkers of the Enlightenment and those who proceeded afterward. The existence of a unique and established truth derived from rationality was considered to be the only acceptable view of society during these time periods. People’s ideas were limited in order to create a rigid and unbendable mind that would be able to shun the transcendentalist element. Science was replacing what Vissarion Belinsky referred to as art, creating a society that was more intent on imitating than innovating.
“When philosophers start talking like architects, get out while you can, chaos is coming. When they start laying down rules for beauty, blood in the streets is from that moment inevitable. Because the answer is not out there like America waiting for Columbus, the same answer for everybody forever. The universal idea speaks through humanity itself, and differently through each nation in each stage of its history.” (pgs. 44-45).
Belinsky is careful to make a distinction between science, which only possesses one indisputable answer, and art, which comprises millions of valid theories and ideas. The sentence that defines philosophers as architects is a protest against the empirical and rationalist view every individual began to adopt. Literature as a form of art needs to proceed from the author’s inmost thoughts. It cannot be established by rigid parameters, but rather engendered by the senses. Most importantly, it is neither right nor wrong, but simply unique. “Every work of art is the breath of a single eternal idea breathed by God into the inner life of the artist.” (p. 45). Art is composed of a metaphysical element and a person’s beliefs, both of which are untested by man and refutable by science; nevertheless, they compose the multifarious “universal idea.”

Since there are no incorrect ideas, everyone’s perspective about the nature of man is equally valid and acceptable. According to Michael, “The life of the Spirit is the only real life: our material existence stands between us and our transcendence to the Universal Idea where we become one with the Absolute!” (p. 14). This character creates a paradox by saying that the “real life” is the intangible soul, while the physical body is just an illusion. This belief contradicts the one embraced by the philosophers who relied on experimentation as the sole basis of their knowledge. Man’s “material existence,” or dependency on worldly objects, prevents him from reaching a state of complete spirituality. This makes it unable for him to get immersed in the “Universal Idea,” understood as the collection of all truths established throughout the history of mankind. The “Absolute,” or God, is an omnipresent force that can only be felt when someone is able to understand every ideological doctrine. Considering our dependency on material goods, one may imply that it is impossible to achieve a state where man and God unite to form one sole presence. Philosophy and art proceeding from the human mind converge in order to create the Universal Idea, a concept so deep that, paradoxically, will never be fully understood by mankind.

Annihilation of Evil by Evil: Final Reaction to Macbeth

As many other classical works, Macbeth ends with the triumph of good over evil; however, unlike most pieces of literature, the wicked forces exterminate themselves without the action of the righteous. One such example is the apparent suicide of Lady Macbeth who, after confessing her feelings of guilt while in her sleep, was unable to carry the burden of murder and sin, represented by the illusion of blood in her hands. The queen achieved all that she ever longed for, but was unable to remove the stains of blood from herself. At the end, remorse and a heavy conscience outweighed power and social status, leading to her death. “… his fiend-like queen (Who, as ‘tis thought, by self and violent hands, Took off her life)…” (V, viii, 82-84).

A second example of this suicide by evil is presented in Macbeth. Macbeth was guilty of his own death because he knew he would be slain by Macduff, but nevertheless the king decided to continue the fight. “Though Birnam Wood be come to Dunsinane And thou opposed, being of no woman born, Yet I will try the last.” (V, viii, 35-37). However, the prophecies of the Weïrd Sisters make the reader doubt about Macbeth’s self-inflicted death. Was Macbeth’s murder caused by his failure to heed the witches’ prophecies or was it simply a rhetorical trick played by the “fate” sisters in order to assure Banquo’s linage? In order to understand this, the reader must analyze the definition of destiny and fate. Are these concepts only able to predict events or are they capable of foreshadowing human responses and behaviors towards particular actions as well? Based on the three apparitions seen by Macbeth, it is possible to infer that the Weïrd Sisters were only attempting to trick the king; consequently, they were merely able to predict actions, but were incapable of foreseeing Macbeth’s reaction to external events. They did not guarantee the murder of Macbeth, but skillfully hinted at it by fooling Macbeth into expecting a different outcome. “And be these juggling fiends no more believed That palter with us in a double sense, That keep the word of promise to our ear And break it to our hope.” (V, viii, 23-26). Birnam Wood’s moving to Dunsinane and the threat of a man not born of woman put Macbeth’s life in danger; however, if he had not fought Macduff, the king would have been deposed and condemned as a tyrant and allowed to conserve his life. The third apparition, which presented Banquo’s descendants as kings, would have been fulfilled even if Macbeth had not been killed. The Macbeth couple did not have any children (alive, that is) that would be able to preserve the dynasty; consequently, Banquo’s descendants would have eventually become kings, whether Macbeth had died or not.

Throughout the drama, Lady Macbeth appeared as the dominant, harsh, and cold character that dominated Macbeth’s desires and actions. Beneath her stiff core, however, lies an individual who, being much weaker than Macbeth himself, is not able to withstand the horrors of blood and murder. Macbeth is less prone to succumb to evil, but when he does, is able to confront it in a much braver manner than his wife, who was not able to endure the though of a murder she had not committed. A puppet of evil, Macbeth failed to feel that same compassion as that experienced by his wife when she refused to assassinate Duncan, whom she claimed to have resembled her father as he slept. When faced with his wife’s death, Macbeth responded coldly by saying, “She should have died hereafter.” (V, v, 20), meaning that her death was inevitable and therefore useless to cry for. The bonds of love were broken by the greed and avarice that resulted from the idolatry of power.

Macbeth knew that the decision to defy fate and fight Macduff would lead him to his death. The exclamation “Yet I will try the last.” (V, vii, 37) is a proof of this man’s valor and perseverance to achieve what he longed the most: honor. Honor comprised both power and an elevated social status, both of which were technically preserved by Macbeth at the moment of his death. When placed in a scale, death and honor outweighed life and shame. Macbeth died a tyrant to his country, but at least managed to secure pride and drag it with him towards the dark pits of hell.

Candide, Continued...: Uncle Vanya, Act IV

When life becomes unbearable, the best attitude one can adopt is a Stoic indifference and ability to deal with whatever comes to you. Both Sonya and Voynitsky led a miserable life full of pain and suffering; however, their separate reactions to these adversities were quite different. Uncle Vanya tried to murder the professor and, when this did not work, stole Astrov’s morphia in order to commit suicide. Sonya, although less learned, decided to continue on with life as if there was nothing she could do to remedy her present situation. “I am just as unhappy, perhaps, as you are; but I am not going to give way to despair. I am bearing it, and will bear it till my life ends of itself.” (Act IV, p. 238). This behavior coincides with two of the philosophies presented in the Handbook of Epictetus. Sonya accepted the things that were not up to her and adopted an attitude that would prove favorable in order to withstand the troubles she was facing. The different reactions of Uncle Vanya and his niece towards the same event show how different perspectives mold a certain circumstance into becoming more or less suitable. As Epictetus said, “‘What weighs down on this man is not what has happened, but his judgment about it.’” (Handbook of Epictetus, p. 15).

Apart from withstanding the burdens they were forced to face, the characters in the play proposed a “Candide-ish” way to live life. When overwhelmed with suffering, the best action one can adopt to relieve the pressure is work. “… you must work, my friends! you must work!” (Act IV, p. 240). As soon as the professor and Yelena left the house, Sonya and all the other characters, including Uncle Vanya, felt a certain vacancy and longing in their souls. Instead of lamenting themselves and wishing their family was back, they sat down to work in fixing accounts, knitting, writing on pamphlets, or even playing the guitar for the entertainment of others. It is important to keep oneself occupied in order to distract one’s mind and forget the pain while simultaneously doing something useful. This same point of view was presented at the end of Candide as well; however, the play Uncle Vanya goes one step forward when Sonya mentions at the end of the text that work will precede rest.
“…we shall patiently bear the trials which fate sends us; we shall work for others, both now and in our old age, and have no rest; and when our time comes we shall die without a murmur… and we shall rest. I have faith, I have faith. You have had no joy in your life, but wait, Uncle Vanya, wait. We shall rest.” (Act IV, pgs. 243-244).
Work will relieve pain and suffering and will able us to endure our lives. Eternal rest is guaranteed by offering a more profound and transcendental view of life after death that not only goes beyond that posed by Candide, but also accords with Newton’s third law of motion and the Judeo-Christian view of reward for sacrifice.

Uncle Vanya’s similitude to Candide is also present in the last sentence and titles of both works. Candide ends with the words “we must go and work in the garden,” or something of the sort, while Uncle Vanya is concluded with Sonya’s exclamation “We shall rest!” (Act IV, p. 244). “We shall rest!” implicitly promotes labor by assuring that eternal rest will be the result of hard toil It can therefore be implied that not only do both of these sentences possess parallel structures, but also revolve around the same concept of work as the key to enduring life. The title “Candide” is based on a character who, after having a very naïve and optimistic view of life, was forced to endure a series of hardships until finally, with the help of other characters, he was able to develop a more realistic view of human existence. The title of Uncle Vanya is also derived from a character that, even though possessing an ill will towards life and every mishap he encountered, also led a pretty wretched life and came to develop a different point of view similar to that sustained by Candide. The ideals and perspectives endorsed by both works are practically the same, making their titles bear the same significance. Although written in different geographic and ethnic contexts, Candide and Uncle Vanya share an increased parallelism and resemblance. By further developing the idea of work with a reward after death, the play Uncle Vanya can be best understood as an extended and revised version of Voltaire’s work.

Realism vs. Idealism: Uncle Vanya, Act III

Act III of the play Uncle Vanya acts as the climax, or “boiling point,” of the entire work. Serebryakov’s selfish desires spark forth a conflict between him and Uncle Vanya, who takes advantage of the opportunity to accuse the professor of having made him live a miserable life. “You have destroyed my life! I have not lived! Thanks to you, I have ruined and wasted the best years of my life. You are my bitterest enemy.” (Act III, pgs. 230-231). In a way, the reader feels pity towards Voynitsky, making him sympathize with this character. A despiteful attitude towards the professor is developed, especially when his daughter Sonya pleads him to have pity on Uncle Vanya and herself because they have spent their entire lives sacrificing themselves and working for the retired old man. These words almost make the reader support Voynitsky’s attempts to shoot Serebryakov. Even though the professor, his wife, Sonya, and Uncle Vanya are active participants in the play’s plot, I believe that all the attention is drawn towards Marina’s calm words at the end of the act. Although she only speaks to soothe Sonya and to condemn the arguments that are going on, she possesses all the qualities that will able a person to confront every adverse situation: calm, moderation, tranquility, and good will. Although she is merely a secondary character in the drama and is the only one that does not take an active role in the argument, Sonya’s words before the curtain closes emphasize the importance of a character like Marina. The exclamation “Nurse, darling! Nurse, darling!” (Act III, p. 233) shows that Marina is both a symbol of relief and the role model everyone must learn to imitate in times of crisis.

Apart from the conflict previously mentioned, there also exists a confrontation between civilization and nature sparked forth by man’s eminent need to modernize. Astrov prefers civilization over conservation; however, he advocates for the preservation of Mother Nature because its present destruction is not achieving any substantial gains. “We have here a degeneration that is the result of too severe a struggle for existence. This degeneration is due to inertia, ignorance, to the complete lack of understanding… And everything has been destroyed already, but nothing as yet has been created to take its place.” (Act III, p. 224). The increasing scientific and technological advancement of mankind a century and a half ago ignited the need to appropriate oneself of everything that lies on one’s way. The advent of an age where man competes against itself appears in the play when, desperate not to succumb under the theory of Social Darwinism, the less privileged and ignorant masses struggle to keep up with modernization and end up destroying nature. Apparently, “the survival of the fittest” will slowly lead to the complete extermination of Mother Nature. As Serebryakov exclaimed, “One can put up with illness, after all; but what I can’t endure is the whole manner of life in the country. I feel as though I had been cast off the earth into some other planet.” (Act III, p. 227). Modernization and technology has shattered our natural habitat and instead replaced it with civilization, or our futile struggles to construct one.

The last “battle” or point of contention in this act is that between truth and uncertainty.
“Yelena: Yes, of course. It seems to me that the truth, however dreadful it is, is not so dreadful as uncertainty. Rely on me, dear.
Sonya: Yes, yes… I shall tell him you want to see his charts… No, uncertainty is better… One has hope, at least.” (Act III, pgs. 221-222).
Subjectivity dominates each person’s point of view on this subject. A more empirical, practical person like myself would prefer the truth over uncertainty. Even though hope is the driving force that leads a person’s life when he/she is in doubt, the truth will always provide the individual with a factual base they can use to construct their lives hereafter. Someone who possesses a more idealistic view of life prefers uncertainty over truth. This way, they will be able to construct their own versions of a fictional reality and live life as though they were in a dream. A wide variety of different outcomes leaves room for imagination and a certain sense of romanticism. Truth generally influences a person to lead a life of rigid order and a strict reality, while many times uncertainty encapsulates an individual from reality and permits him/her to live inside a pleasant dream. It is up to the person to determine the standards that will dominate their existence.

A Machiavellic Individuality: Uncle Vanya, Act II

The play Uncle Vanya is characterized by a sense of pessimism and ill will towards life itself. Alexandr Vladimirovitch Serebrayakov, the professor, is a key element in both determining the form of the novel and in shaping the miserable lives of the characters in the play.
“Yelena: I am worn out… for God’s sake be quiet!
Serebrayakov: It seems that, thanks to me, everyone is worn out, depressed, wasting their youth, and I am the only one enjoying life and satisfied. Oh, yes, of course!” (Act II, p. 206).
The exclamation at the end of Serebrayakov’s passage permits the reader to understand the sarcasm of his entire comment. Due to him, everyone is living an unhappy existence; however, he is the most wretched individual of all. He does not understand that everyone, including his young wife Yelena, his tired daughter Sonya, and the restless doctor Astrov are permanently at his service, ready to aid him in whatever he needs. His presence in the house, and hence Yelena’s too, causes Voynitsky to abandon his work and adopt an attitude of utter despair that revolves around his love for Yelena. Even Marina, an old nurse, is forced to pray and take care of the professor, who is indifferent to Marina’s terrible leg pains. Apparently, Serebrayakov does not realize this and instead goes on making a victim of himself and sacrificing the happiness and tranquility of those around him.

The mood of the novel is dominated by this tension and unfriendliness. It is so common and quotidian that we do not realize the gravity of this issue until Yelena mentions the magnitude this type of behavior has in determining the peace and stability of the world. “… the world is not being destroyed through fire or robbery, but through hatred, enmity and all this petty wrangling… It ought to be your work to reconcile and not to grumble.” (Act II, p. 209). Uncle Vanya, to whom this comment is directed, does not heed the warnings Yelena gives him but instead goes on complaining and lamenting about his current situation. This type of attitude is reflected almost daily in our lives. A sense of rivalry towards the opposite individual, group, or nations shapes our desire to crush the opponent and achieve supremacy over others. Most of the world conflicts have been sparked forth by “petty wrangling” over insignificant issues that could easily be solved with a little of self-sacrifice from each nation. One such example is the Vietnam War, waged with the purpose of detaining the spread of communism. The armed conflict could have been avoided if the governments of the United States, South Vietnam, and North Vietnam had agreed on a boundary between these two nations. A little self sacrifice from the leaders at Washington D.C., Saigon, and Hanoi could have prevented the deaths of many innocent troops and civilians, as well as the staggering war costs and destruction undergone by the Vietnamese cities. This proves how greed and enmity dominates human relationships in both the play and the real world, often leading in the destruction of the world.

Many times in life, a goal or an ultimate destination is the necessary force to drive one’s actions and behavior. “You know when you walk through a forest on a dark night, and a light gleams in the distance, you do not notice your weariness, nor the darkness, nor the sharp twigs that lash you in the face.” (Act II, pgs. 213-214). This machiavellic view of life, where the end justifies the means, can be very useful in persuading oneself to achieve a certain objective; however, it can sometimes ruin the lives of many individuals for the sake of accomplishing one’s own selfish motives. This metaphorical passage, although machiavellic in a sense, does not comprise the well-being of other people and instead offers an alternative to that posed by the Italian philosopher in his book The Prince. The forest, like in Dante’s Inferno, represents one’s troubled and confused life. The light, or one’s target, drives a person to continue on with the struggle until finally one is able to exit the forest and reap the fruits of what one managed to achieve. Especially significant are the mishaps and difficulties one encounters during the journey: weariness, darkness, and pain. Darkness represents confusion and the “sharp twigs that lash you in the face” symbolize all the problems one is prone to encounter. If the reader notices carefully, all the troubles and inconveniences faced throughout the journey only harm the individual that is “walking through the forest,” and not everyone else that surrounds him/her. Chekhov is careful to make a distinction between the different magnitudes of machiavellic behavior through a redefinition and limitation of the standards posed in The Prince. The expression “the end justifies the means,” therefore, is only valid when oneself is the only individual who remains at stake for one’s own actions.

An Unsuccessful Quest for the Meaning of Life: Uncle Vanya, Act I

Throughout the ages, many people of different cultures and places have wondered about the purpose of life. Humans’ increased rational capacity has led them to question mankind’s role here on Earth. Some individuals argue that life is a quest for happiness, and therefore each one of us must struggle until we accomplish the ultimate goal that will completely satisfy us and eliminate the urge to want more. Others, like Martin and the Turk in Candide, believe that suffering and hard work are the sole purpose of life. In the play Uncle Vanya by Anton Chekhov, the character Astrov, a doctor, contradicts both of these views by complaining about hard work and the people that surround us. The fact that Astrov is a doctor is greatly significant in the sense that not only is he a very learned man, but is also an expertise in the study of humans. “And the life in itself is tedious, stupid, dirty… This life swallows one up completely. There are none but queer people about one - they are a queer lot, all of them - and when one has lived two or three years among them, by degrees one turns queer too, without noticing it.” (Act I, p. 194). By saying that life is “tedious” and “stupid,” Chekhov is implying that our existence here on Earth is completely fruitless and monotonous. There is nothing deep or transcendental about life and there are no secrets behind our creation. Life simply is. The adjective “dirty” adds a sense of misery and distaste to every person’s lifestyle. This pessimistic and somewhat realistic view almost makes us wish for death. The second part of the fragment says that everyone, including ourselves, is queer. Although the reason for our strange and odd behavior is not stated, the previous descriptions of life make it possible to imply that mankind’s bizarre conduct is the product of a fruitless quest to make life pleasurable and worthwhile. We are permanently looking for reasons that do not exist, trying to find meaning inside a shallow existence. We make life a quest for happiness, but we will never be able to find it because “life in itself is tedious, stupid, dirty.” (Act I. p. 194).

Suffering and hard work, unlike the search for happiness, will someday yield fruitful and worthy results. Astrov, however, also deems this practice as a waste of time. “I sat down, shut my eyes like this, and thought: those who will live a hundred or two hundred years after us, for whom we are struggling now to beat out a road, will they remember and say a good word for us? Nurse, they won’t, you know!” (Act I, p. 194). We are breaking our backs and sacrificing ourselves in order to achieve the betterment of future generations. Those who will live after us will reap the fruit of our hard toil, but will never even take the time to thank us for improving their lifestyles. This reasoning undermines the philosophy of Martin and the Turk in the sense that suffering and hard work will only bring exhaustion and oblivion to our lives. This reminds me about the actual debate on global warming and the Kyoto Protocol, in which highly industrialized nations such as the United States refuse to cooperate in an effort to reduce the emissions of global warming because of the increased production costs this effort would imply. This is a perfect example of “Astrovian” philosophy, in which private energy need not be sacrificed for the public good.

This type of negative view towards life is also present in many other characters, such as Voynitsky or Uncle Vanya. When Yelena exclaims that it is a beautiful day, Voynitsky merely responds by saying “A fine day to hang oneself!” (Act I, p. 200). These contending points of view reflect the opposite extremes of the human mind. When faced with an objective, unchangeable fact, everyone tends to react in a different manner. Some, like Yelena, are prone to observe the beauty and good side of every situation; however, there exist others like Uncle Vanya who are only able to see the pessimistic and unfavorable side of things. Both positive and negative views towards life shape our beliefs and actions towards the experiences we encounter. Our personality is the main factor in shaping our reactions to certain events in life. This play showed the reader how, in exactly the same time and context, different characters were able to perceive different things when faced with exactly the same situation. This proves how ourselves and not the burdens we are forced to carry are the most important component in determining the way each one of us leads their life.

Fictitious Permanence: A Simple Heart, by Gustave Flaubert

The story A Simple Heart, by Gustave Flaubert, narrates the story of Felicity, servant in the household of Madame Aubain. Throughout the story, the reader is able to notice Felicity’s dependence on other people and her vulnerability when forced to face the outside world by herself. Virginia’s death was a matter of intense grief and sadness for those who knew her; however, Felicity suffered more from this loss than Madame Aubain, the mother of the child.
“In the morning, from habit, Felicity went into Virginia’s room and looked at the walls. She missed not having her hair to comb, her boots to lace, to tuck her in her bed… She was good for nothing, could not sleep, to use her own expression was ‘a wreck’.” (p. 7).
Felicity did not miss the character of Virginia herself, but rather the tasks she engaged herself in while Virginia was alive. When the child passed away the servant’s occupations ceased to exist. Having nothing to do to pass the time away, she became “a wreck.” Felicity’s urge for someone to be with increased to such extent as to be willing to act as her family’s slave in return for some company. She cherished every moment she spent with Victor, her nephew, simply because of the pleasure of having something to do while the time passed by. “He brought his clothes to be mended, and she accepted this task, glad of the chance which forced him to come back.” (p. 7). Felicity’s dependency on someone to keep her company made her a very vulnerable human being. Her fear of solitude placed her at the mercy of others and made her reliant on external situations to preserve her own spirit.

Victor’s death at sea forced Felicity to search for other objects or people she could use in order to satisfy her need for companionship. She developed a reciprocal relationship with the insect-eaten hat Madame Aubain gave her and the cancer-consumed Father Colmiche. Since the sick man depended on Felicity’s care in order to continue living, the servant was able to “own” him. The same situation happened with the hat and every other material good she accumulated in her room. These were objects Felicity could call her own, thus satisfying her simple heart’s desires for someone or something that could keep her company at any time.

These wishes were finally secured with the appearance of Loulou, a parrot that soon became Felicity’s devoted pet. When she began to loose her hearing and alienating herself from the exterior world, Loulou acted as the string that kept Felicity attached to reality. “Loulou, in her isolation, was almost a son, a lover.” (p. 14). When Loulou passed away, Felicity was forced to evade solitude by stuffing the bird and idolatrizing his figure. “This spot, to which she admitted few people, had the look at once of a chapel and a bazaar, it contained so many religious objects and heteroclite things.” (p. 15). Felicity began to venerate the bird as a holy figure, as something comparable to the Holy Ghost. She “... contracted the idolatrous habit of saying her prayers before the parrot.” (p. 16). Felicity could not bear the loss of the bird because its body was the only object that kept her satisfied. Material goods became the main focus of her life. Beings lived and died, their souls lost forever, but material goods appeared to last infinitely.

Later on, Felicity was forced to halt the passage of time by retaining all the material goods that reminded her of the past and made the illusion of delaying change. The house began falling apart and the stuffed parrot started to decay. Nevertheless, the servant would not let these things go. She mourned change and needed a tangible proof to show her that the present had not altered its course. She clung to the past, trying to hold time still and denying the natural flow of events. This reminds me of the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. Lot’s wife Ruth was turned into a pillar of salt for looking back into the past instead of looking forward into the future. Nothing is permanent in the world, so there is no purpose in trying to freeze the past. Felicity’s attempts to satisfy the worldly desires of her simple heart were submerged under life’s natural course. Like Heraclitus said, permanence is an illusion and everything is in a process of constant change and movement.

Note: the above reflections on the importance of the present and the irrelevance of the past reminds me of an ancient Sanskrit poem my mom has framed in her room:

Look to this day
for it is life
the very life of life
In its brief course lie all
the realities and truths of existence
the joy of growth
the splendor of action
the glory of power
For yesterday is but a memory
And tomorrow is only a vision
But today well lived
makes every yesterday a memory of happiness
and every tomorrow a vision of hope
Look well, therefore, to this day!

The Value of Suffering and Neediness in Shaping Human Nature: Seize the Day, Chapters VI - VII

Suffering is man’s best friend. Sorrow, guilt, deception, and all other emotions that make a person feel miserable and useless are all byproducts of suffering and the lack of happiness in one’s life. All of these result in longing, or the desire to live a more comfortable, better life that will produce the outcomes a certain individual needs in order to be able to carry out a happy existence. Happiness, therefore, is man’s worst enemy. It is a mere illusion that restlessly disturbs our consciences, a desire that will never be fully achieved. The absence of happiness leads to suffering, which becomes a person’s permanent companion and the sole unchanging aspect of their lives. “Yes, thought Wilhelm, suffering is the only kind of life they are sure they can have, and if they quit suffering they’re afraid they’ll have nothing.” (p. 94). When suffering ceases to exist, all aspects of the world we are accustomed to live in tumble down as well. Happiness can be defined as a utopia, an ideological paradise which will never be able to materialize and come into existence; thus, when suffering vanishes from our lives we are left with a void, an emptiness only the perpetual, incessant suffering can fill.

Apart from the insights on solitude, Seize the Day also exposed the complex paradox of need and abundance: “They don’t need therefore they have. I need, therefore I don’t have. That would be too easy.” (p. 97). This passage is trying to communicate life’s relativity when faced with different mental conditions. An individual who does not need anything in life will greet any insignificant benefit as a surplus that will contribute to construct his life and improve his conditions. A person who has his mind permanently fixed on the need to acquire more will welcome a fortune as a worthless acquisition which is unable to entirely fill the gap he has fabricated in his mind. When one has his mind fixed on the need to obtain something, everything else in life becomes scarce and insufficient; however, when one expects nothing, anything else will come as a present and an addition that will contribute to make his existence more plentiful.

The ending of the novel was not what I expected. In fact, Wilhelm did nothing in order to “seize the day.” At the end of the book, Wilhelm had gotten nowhere in life. He still possessed this inconsumable desire, this void in life which, according to the previous paragraph, would never be able to fill itself up. Bellow says that this character “…sank deeper than sorrow, through torn sobs and cries toward the consummation of his heart’s ultimate need.” (p. 114). The reader is left with many unanswered questions. Did Wilhelm lacking everything or did he need something specific? If so, what did he need? The words “his heart’s ultimate need” revolve around a very ambiguous concept. Tommy Wilhelm’s life lacked everything from love to stability to purposefulness. When he exclaimed to his father “‘You don’t give the little bit I beg you for.’” (p. 106), Wilhelm was talking about his need for love, even if this manifestation involved the demonstration of the most insignificant action which could reveal that Dr. Adler did, in fact, care for him. Wilhelm, devastated by Tamkin’s untrustworthiness and fluctuant attitude, had the necessity to ensure a little stability in his life. The constant increase and decrease in stock marked prices symbolized the unstable conditions this character was forced to live with; thus, Wilhelm was in desperate need of someone or something he could trust and rely on in times of crisis. In addition to this, the character of Wilhelm was deprived of a fixed goal in life he was set to accomplish, something that would differ him from all other individuals and make him a separate, independent character. Right before entering the church, Wilhelm recalled seeing a “…great crowd, pouring out, pressing round, of every age, of every genius, possessors of every human secret, antique and future, in every face the refinement of one particular motive or essence - I labor, I spend, I strive, I design, I love, I cling, I uphold, I give way, I envy, I long, I scorn, I die, I hide, I want.” (p. 111). All but Tommy Wilhelm, already in his mid-forties, possessed a certain characteristic that distinguished them from all other individuals. His heart’s ultimate need could have been the necessity of being someone, anyone in life. All of these needs rely on a tangible object or person in order to fulfill themselves. Materialism demanded Wilhelm to live a plentiful life where financial success was paralleled by an appearance of stability. Wilhelm needed to thrive in his social relations towards other individuals, such as his father, and in his economic relations with money and wealth as well.

When viewed from a more abstract, sentimental approach, the concepts of "seize the day" and the main character's ultimate need vary. Wilhelm needed to be an individual who, unlike his father, would be able to express his feelings in whatever way he desired without experiencing any shame or remorse. As an attack to materialistic society, Bellow might have created in Wilhelm a true human being who lived life not for the stake of money but for the well-being of his emotional self. The phrase "seize the day," then, adopts a totally different meaning. Success is not measured by the amount of material goods one manages to secure in life, but by one's ability to be oneself at any desired moment. Sobs and tears are not a sign of weakness, but rather a proof of one's ability to relieve the burdens one carries inside the soul. "...Dad, I just can't breathe. My chest is all up - I feel choked. I just simply can't catch my breath." (p. 105). In the end, this character managed to eliminate the suffocating feeling that congested his body and soul. The triumph of human nature over the modern, mechanical world was symbolized in Wilhelm's break-down at the church. It is true that Tommy Wilhelm's life lacked love, confidence, and purposefulness, but these, like tears, are simply aspects that distinguish us humans from any other ordinary machine. Suffering and neediness add spark and meaning to our lives, making of this entire experience an opportunity to highlight our separate, individualistic natures and "seize the day."

Personal Development in a Gilded, Consumerist Society: Seize the Day, Chapters III - V

Like Oedipa Maas in The Crying of Lot 49, Tommy Wilhelm in Seize the Day undergoes a personal development which is far more controversial and significant than the plot of the novel per say. This progressive improvement in behavior and analytical capacities in Wilhelm’s life changes dramatically from chapter to chapter. For example, in Chapter Three, this character sees his existence as something miserable and laments his situation in life. “‘Oh, Dad, Dad, what a hole I’m in!’ said Wilhelm in utter misery… Wilhelm took hold of his broad throat with brown-stained fingers and bitten nails and began to choke himself… neither can you and I be compared, because you, Dad, were a success. And a success – is a success. I never made a success.” (pgs. 45, 48). The main character of the novel expresses pity for himself in the way he acts and talks. He defines himself as a failure in life who never managed to accomplish anything worthwhile. In addition to this, Bellow makes sure that Wilhelm’s appearance remains devastated and wretched. The connotation of the words “brown-stained fingers” and “bitten nails” not only symbolizes Wilhelm’s anti-hygienic customs, but also represents this character’s downcast view of himself. The lack of care for his physical appearance implies that Wilhelm has become completely indifferent to his thoughts and emotions as well.

Wilhelm’s rational capacity and mental state show a significant improvement in the next chapter:
“…he received a suggestion from some remote element in his thoughts that the business of life, the real business – to carry his peculiar burden, to feel shame and impotence, to taste these quelled tears – the only important business, the highest business was being done. Maybe the making of mistakes expressed the very purpose of his life and the essence of his being here.” (p. 52).
Wilhelm ceased to feel pity for himself by reflecting about the purpose of life and our existence here on Earth. Misery was not a burden any more, but rather a necessity. Feeling depressed and insignificant, as Wilhelm now reflected, is a person’s sole goal and purpose while his existence on the planet. According to this philosophy, Wilhelm’s misfortunes were not caused by his impotence and failures, but by his necessity to fulfill “the business of life.”

Following Tamkin’s advise to focus on the present and “Seize the day.” (p. 62), Wilhelm proceeded to take advantage of the opportunities life presented him with. Chapter Five was inaugurated with Wilhelm’s conviction to redress the mistakes he had committed in life. “He believed that he must, that he could and would recover the good things, the happy things, the easy tranquil things of life. He had made mistakes, but he could overlook these.” (p. 74). By adopting a totally different attitude that related accordingly to the title of the work, Tommy Wilhelm began to take advantage of the present situations life offered him. He began taking an active role in every situation that concerned him, for example the price of lard and his investments on this product. Thus, the character began to “seize the day,” take advantage of every opportunity, learn something meaningful from every occurrence, and struggle in order to achieve “the best possible outcome” out of the present situation.

Apart from illustrating the change the character of Wilhelm underwent, Seize the Day also criticizes the consumerist, materialistic world of the 1950’s. “‘They burn up the world – oil, coal, wood, metal, and soil, and suck even the air and sky. They consume, and they give back no benefit. A man like you, humble for life, who wants to feel and live, has trouble – not wanting.’” (p. 77). Money and corruption is mentioned everywhere. Even Wilhelm himself, who despises money and criticizes his father for the value he places on wealth, is forced to live his life at mercy of the stock market and the changes in the prices of lard and rye. Bellow is trying to promote a society in which abstract, intangible feelings, not material goods, are the basis to become someone important and significant in life. “‘If thou cans not love, what art thou?’… ‘What art thou?’ Nothing. That’s the answer.” (p. 66). Love is the purest of all emotions and the one which demands the most sacrifice as well; however, sorrow, not love, is the feeling humans depend upon in life:
“Come then, Sorrow!
Sweetest Sorrow!
Like an own babe I nurse thee on my breast!
I thought to leave thee,
And deceive thee,
But now of all the world I love thee best.” (pgs. 85-86).
This poem illustrates a person’s desperate want of sorrow. By using the adjective “sweetest,” the author praises and glorifies this emotion by making it more likeable than all the rest. Like a babe, sorrow is naturally attached and dependent on oneself. It relies on an individual to nurse him and keep him alive within him. Even though it sometimes becomes a burden for us in life and sparks the wish to “leave” and “deceive” it, sorrow becomes a person’s best friend and most devoted love. By behaving as such, this emotion assumes the role of staying with us permanently. Since it is impossible to get rid of it, it is easier to deal with it as something we desire rather than despise. Sorrow becomes part of our lives. The constant feeling of sorrow, distress, and misery only leaves room in our minds for longing. Longing, as seen with Wilhelm, materializes itself into actions that we perform in life in order to retrieve a state of stability and security; henceforth, sorrow is a permanent emotion that drives our behavior and initiative to succeed and “seize the day.”

Corrections on Previous Blogs

“Outage”
“Outage,” a short story by John Updike, reflects the monotonous existence people of the XXIst century are accustomed to have, an existence where electricity, technology, and sex are the only elements that constitute their reality.

“Outage,” a short story by John Updike, reflects the monotonous existence people of the XXIst century are accustomed to have. Electricity, technology, and sex are the only elements that constitute their reality.


Candide, Chapters XXI - XXX
Pangloss remained as stubborn as ever. Although he still defended his philosophy that “‘all is for the best in the best of all possible worlds’.” (back cover), Pangloss ceased to believe in it and, therefore, undermined its entire foundations.

Pangloss remained as stubborn as ever; although he still defended his philosophy that “‘all is for the best in the best of all possible worlds’.” (back cover), Pangloss ceased to believe in it and, therefore, undermined its entire foundations.


Candide, Chapters XVI - XX
Candide is accepting a pragmatic approach to life, where true facts and events, not simple inferences with nor credibility or evidence at all, mold the mind’s reasoning.

Candide is accepting a pragmatic approach to life, where true facts and events, not simple inferences with no credibility or evidence at all, mold the mind’s reasoning.

Victimization’s Camouflage: Seize the Day, Chapters I - II

Tommy Wilhelm, best described as a failure in life, possesses no similarity whatsoever with the title of the book, Seize the Day. His life is composed of losses and misfortunes but, most importantly, of a profound, deep-rooted resentment towards his father, Dr. Adler. Although Wilhelm is constantly criticizing the old man’s polite, hypocritical behavior, there is never really any tangible proof to demonstrate Dr. Adler’s supposed evil nature. Wilhelm’s criticisms about his father’s personality are powerful and extremist, yet possess no base to support them or add credibility to his inferences. “After any talk with Dr. Adler, Wilhelm generally felt dissatisfied, and his dissatisfaction reached its greatest intensity when they discussed family matters. Ostensibly he had been trying to help the old man to remember a date, but in reality he meant to tell him, ‘You were set free when Ma died. You wanted to forget her. Me, too.’” (p. 26). Wilhelm expresses a profound hatred for his father, giving the reader the impression that Wilhelm himself, not the old man, is the one with the problem. When one comes to think about it, Tommy is the reflection of everything his father managed not to be: unsuccessful, frustrated, insecure, and pathetic. After being faced with the loss of his job and an unsuccessful marriage, Wilhelm is forced to live with his father, a figure agreeable to the public who managed to assess both financial security and social respect.

As Mucho Maas said in The Crying of Lot 49, a car is a mirror of a person’s life:
“Forgetfully, Wilhelm traveled for miles in second gear; he was seldom in the right lane and he neither gave signals nor watched for lights. The upholstery of his Pontiac was filthy with grease and ashes.” (p. 30). The car is a representation of Tommy’s own existence. The fact that he travels in “second gear” represents his uncommitted, effortless attitude towards life itself. The connotation of the words “right lane” possesses a double meaning, both literal and figurative. “Right” can define the opposite of left, but it can also come to represent correctness. By stating the fact that Wilhelm “was seldom in the right lane,” Bellow is emphasizing that Tommy fails to make the correct decisions or adopt an assertive attitude towards life itself. Not giving signals or watching out for lights symbolizes the character’s failure to both give and receive positive experiences and teachings in life. His behavior and relationship with others is not reciprocal: Wilhelm has nothing to give, and at the same time is unable to receive and interpret the signals life provides him with, such as Tamkin’s apparent unbalance. Finally, the filthiness in his car represents the untidiness in his life. Wilhelm does not care about maintaining a stable and enduring relationship with anyone, not even his wife or his job.

Seize the Day also poses a critique towards the excessive value and importance people attribute to money. “Uch! How they love money, thought Wilhelm. They adore money! Holy money! Beautiful money! It was getting so that people were feeble minded about everything except money. While if you didn’t have it you were a dummy, a dummy!” (p. 32). Money has come to occupy the most important pillar in which people construct their lives upon. In fact, this item has become the basis of everybody’s existence. “They made it a shame not to have money and set everybody to work.” (p. 27). Tommy Wilhelm talks about money in an ironic way in order to recreate a society in which wealth and other material goods act as gods. Even though the main character presents the reader with an unworldly perspective towards life, one can notice how the invisible yet powerful grasp of money has managed to seduce and succumb the unconscious Wilhelm into the midst of a degrading, materialistic culture: “He thought, The money! When I had it, I flowed money. They bled it away from me. I hemorrhaged money. But now it’s almost gone, and where am I supposed to turn for more?” (p. 36). Apparently, Tommy is also a slave of wealth and riches. What’s worse, Wilhelm decides to criticize everyone and everything without discovering that the gravest faults lie within him. He sees himself as a victim of other people’s points of views and actions, but never realizes that he is actually a bad imitation of everything he attacks.

A Short Story to Recreate a Materialistic Reality:"Outage," by John Updike

“Outage,” a short story by John Updike, reflects the monotonous existence people of the XXIst century are accustomed to have, an existence where electricity, technology, and sex are the only elements that constitute their reality. Brad Morris, the main character, finds himself stuck in the middle of a power outage that paralyzed the entire activity in his home and near-by town. “Without electricity, there was nothing to do.” (p.1). Technology plays a mayor role in modern life. Its value and esteem has become so high, in fact, that humans today have developed a dependency on machines and other electrical devices in order to continue with their daily, monotonous tasks. “He felt impotent, amused by his impotence, in this emergency.” (p. 2). Man is useless without technology. So useless, in fact, that a brief power outage comes to be called an “emergency.” Daily life has become computerized, uncontrollable by human instinct and instead managed entirely by the new appliances that arise. The magnitude of our dependability of machines has risen exponentially over the past few years, converting humanity into a bunch of useless individuals unable to perform any sort of task without external help.

Another common element that persisted throughout the last pages of the story was sex. Brad and Lynne’s vulnerability to succumb to their urges is presented as something natural, even though they are both cheating on their spouses. Like Cúnegonde in Candide, these two characters view sex with different people as something “human” and “harmless.” (p. 4). What’s more alarming still is the increasing rate at which sex as an act of love and devotion to another person is being undermined and simply used as a means to satisfy human desires. “He did not want to feel that this neighbor was much younger than he, but an age difference was declared in how calmly and quickly she had shed her clothes, as if it were no big deal.” (p. 7).

The XXIst century has been flooded with high indexes of production and human activity. Amid the struggles to make life easier to handle in a world where stress, economic pursuits, and sexual urges put every individual at the service of a materialistic god, our existence as what used to be a real human being still remains shallow and irrelevant. When compared to the plot of Candide, the reader finds that modern society is yet much more conformist than that of the XVIIIth century. After all, electricity is all it takes to please an individual. There is no search for a better reality or any hope of human goodness, as these values and aspirations prove to be irrelevant today. Based on the previous inferences, I can conclude that the title of the work, “Outage,” is not referred only to a power outage, but to an outage of human individuality as well. Like the irrelevancy of the story’s plot, our existence has become completely insignificant. Our lives as men, controlled by emotions and our ability to think rationally, have shut down.

The element that questioned me the most was not the materialism of modern lifestyle, but rather its abandonment when the electricity returned and Brad and Lynne interrupted sex. “Brad turned his eyes from her nakedness, his wispy blonde’s. ‘It’s saying,’ he told her, ‘ ‘This is how it is. This is reality.’ ’” (p. 7). Why would a wake up call back to reality interrupt the impulsiveness of the characters’ behavior? If the return of electricity symbolizes a return to monotonous life, why do Brad and Lynne decide to abandon sex, an activity presented as normal and typical in the short story? I believe that by using this apparent paradox, Updike manages to communicate and strengthen the message of the monotony of modern life. It is impossible to experience any sort of emotion, such as the conventional excitement of sexual intercourse, simply because this would disrupt the normal, quotidian pattern of events we are accustomed to experience daily. Sex is presented as a common way to relieve the pressures of everyday life, dominated entirely by technology and human inability to carry out a meaningful, significant existence.

The Double Purpose in Writing Candide: Candide, Chapters XXI - XXX

One aspect I noticed about Voltaire’s assails against the society of his times was that his criticism got more direct and straightforward as the novel progressed. At the beginning, XVIIIth century optimism was attacked with Pangloss’s philosophy, which preached that “‘all is for the best in the best of all possible worlds’.” (back cover). Satirical approaches, such as glorifying war and using ridiculous names like Thunder-ten-Tronckh, were used by Voltaire in order to arouse public conscience and make individuals realize that the ideals they upheld were completely erroneous. In the last ten chapters the author of Candide decreased the use of satire, replacing it with more direct criticisms:
“‘What can you expect?’ said Martin. ‘That’s how people here are made. Imagine every possible contradiction and inconsistency, and you will find them in the government, the law-courts, the churches, and in the whole life of this absurd nation.’” (pgs 99-100).
The reason for this shift in the form of writing still remains unclear to me. I do not understand why, after using sarcasm in such an artistic and crafty way, Voltaire decided to begin stating his grievances in such a straightforward manner. I noticed that all of this began with the appearance of Martin, a very honorable character that contradicted Pangloss by condemning the world and the human race. These two individuals hold opposite views on life and nature of mankind. Pangloss’ innocence makes him seem like a fool in the eyes of the reader, while Martin’s objectivity and realism makes him a very wise and learned man. I believe that Voltaire used direct criticism to characterize Martin and promote the ideals modern society should uphold, ideals that contradicted “Panglossian” conformism embraced by XVIIIth century society.
“‘Do you think,’ said Candide, ‘that men have always massacred each other, as they do to-day, that they have always been false, cozening, faithless, ungrateful, thieving, weak, inconstant, mean-spirited, envious, greedy, drunken, miserly, ambitious, bloody, slanderous, debauched, fanatic, hypocritical, and stupid?’
‘Do you think,’ said Martin, ‘that hawks have always eaten pigeons when they could find them?’
‘Of course I do,’ said Candide.
‘Well,’ said Martin, ‘if hawks have always had the same character, why should you suppose that men have changed theirs?’” (p. 96).
Men are evil by instinct, and there is nothing we can do about it. We cannot please ourselves by believing that every cause leads to the best possible consequence, as men possess a wicked character that only leads to suffering and war. Voltaire is trying to promote a different view of life where men are unhappy and forced to bear the terrible happenings of an imperfect world. We cannot hold an optimistic view towards life, but rather try to battle our evil nature and make our existence bearable.

Martin is the key figure the reader should follow and learn to imitate. His pessimistic views about life managed to convince the stubborn Pangloss and the optimistic Candide, both of which abandoned their old ideals on human goodness and life’s perfection.
“Martin’s conclusion was that man was born to suffer from the restlessness of anxiety or from the lethargy of boredom. Candide did not agree, but he admitted nothing. Pangloss allowed that his sufferings had been uniformly horrible; but as he had once maintained that everything would turn out right in some marvelous way, he still maintained it would, however little he believed it.” (p. 140).
Although Candide and Pangloss publicly objected Martin’s views on human suffering, Martin’s ideals proved to be victorious in the struggle against optimism. Candide’s naiveness was impossible to defeat; however, deep inside there were no arguments that managed to contradict Martin. Pangloss remained as stubborn as ever; although he still defended his philosophy that “‘all is for the best in the best of all possible worlds’.” (back cover), Pangloss ceased to believe in it and, therefore, undermined its entire foundations.

“Panglossian” conformism towards the outcomes of life needs to be rejected. Like Martin and the Turk said, work is the only solution that will make our existence bearable and free us from life’s three evils: “‘boredom, vice, and poverty.’” (p. 143). The motives for writing the novel Candide are placed in a totally different light. Maybe Voltaire not only meant to challenge the conformism and optimism of his times by proposing a different way of dealing with life, but also engage in a personal struggle in which the work involved in producing a text of such great magnitude would free him of life’s greatest evils.

“‘That’s true enough,’ said Candide; ‘but we must go and work in the garden.’ (p. 144).

Voltaire's Paradox: Candide, Chapters XVI - XX

These few chapters were a breaking point in the novel as well as in Candide’s life. This character evolved from having a naïve, innocent view of life to adopting a more realistic position towards the events and occurrences that unfolded before him throughout his journey to South America. At first, Candide ceased being so gullible when he began questioning the validity of Pangloss’s inferences.
“‘Oh, Pangloss!’ cried Candide. ‘A scandal like this never occurred to you! But it’s the truth, and I shall have to renounce that optimism of yours in the end.
‘What is optimism?’ asked Cacambo.
‘It’s the passion for maintaining that all is right when all goes wrong with us,’ replied Candide, weeping as he looked at the negro.” (p. 86).
Candide is accepting the fact that evil does exist in the world and at the same time emphasizing the philosophy that everything that occurs in the universe is bad; consequently, Candide is indirectly assuring that nothing has a positive outcome and, hence, not only denying but also opposing Pangloss’s theory. As the time progressed and Candide became a spectator to more and more horrors, his incredulity escalated up to a point where he even doubted the true nature of man, which determines someone’s behavior throughout the rest of their lifetimes. “The wickedness of man appeared to him in all its ugliness, and his mind became a prey to gloomy thoughts.” (p. 89). Candide is accepting a pragmatic approach to life, where true facts and events, not simple inferences with no credibility or evidence at all, mold the mind’s reasoning. In his work, Voltaire promoted and strengthened the ideas of Thomas Hobbes, a philosopher contemporary to Voltaire’s times who, in his book Leviathan, proclaimed that man was naturally evil and selfish.
“‘… and in those towns which seem to enjoy the blessings of peace and where the arts flourish, men suffer more from envy, cares, and anxiety than a besieged town suffers from the scourges of war, for secret vexations are much more cruel than public miseries. In short, I have seen and experienced so much, that I am forced to believe that man’s origin is evil.’” (p. 92).

Apart from mocking social pretensions, as I stated in previous blogs, Voltaire begins to criticize the value and importance man has placed on gold and other riches. Eldorado is the perfect example of a utopia: there exists no sadness or poverty and men engage in a happy lifestyle, avoiding wars and all sorts of conflicts. The inhabitants of this city view wealth and material goods as something insignificant and worthless that nobody will ever bother to steal or fight for. Wealth is relative; therefore, what’s valuable is not the tangible object per say, but the value man has placed on it: “…but as we are surrounded by unscalable rocks and precipices, we have so far been sheltered from the greed of European nations, who have a quite irrational lust for the pebbles and dirt found in our soil, and would kill every man of us to get hold of them.” (p. 79).

The inhabitants of Eldorado hold and unworldly view towards life. They are not interested, like their European brothers, to make the acquisition of wealth their main focus in life; however, they manage to live in perfect harmony and order, making the reader believe that the key to constructing a utopia is not the possession of endless riches, but of no riches at all. Voltaire takes this assumption one step further by mentioning that the comforts of an opulent life can vanish easily: “‘You see, my friend, how perishable are the riches of this world. There is nothing solid but virtue and the prospect of seeing Lady Cunégonde again.’” (p. 85). A paradox is established by saying that only that which is abstract has the certainty of remaining permanent and constant in one’s life.

A Knock on the Door of Freedom and Individuality: Candide, Chapters XX - XXV

If everything that occurs in the world is always the best outcome, how can individuals know when something has a bad result? Can anything even be bad? If the term bad does not exist, does this mean that good is inexistent too? Is everything neutral, then?

“‘We are going to a different world,’ said Candide, ‘and I expect it is the one where all goes well; for I must admit that regrettable things happen in this world of ours, moral and physical acts that one cannot approve of.’” (p. 48).
Candide has been taught to perpetually hold an optimistic view about life and, therefore, learn to accept every outcome as the best possible result. His opinions about human existence form a one-way street that acts as the only alternative one can pursue in order to search for an explanation about the intricate ways of life. When holding an idyllic view of the occurrences that take place throughout one’s lifetime, an individual’s ardent desire to alter the course of events vanishes while simultaneously succumbing to the denial of a better reality. Value judgments disappear because, as Pangloss said, “‘… it is impossible for things not to be where they are, because everything is for the best.’” (p. 35). If this philosophy, although criticized by Voltaire, acts as the apparent truth the characters of Candide follow, how can Candide and his lady companions hold the prospect of finding a better reality? If Europe is the “best possible outcome” for its millions of inhabitants, how can a utopia such as the New World come into existence? How can two simultaneous realities defy each other if both of them offer the supreme alternative for our lives?

More important that these rhetorical questions is Voltaire’s purpose in writing such an absurd contradiction. Did the satirist mean to criticize man’s empiric mind during the Enlightenment and prove to the world that the millions of inferences one managed to make throughout the course of life formed an inconsistent view of events and reality? Did Voltaire want to illustrate man’s contending views on apparently reasonable theories and our contrary reactions when confronted with a real situation? Did the passage mean to criticize life in the XVIIIth century, or simply provide the reader with a rhetorical question in order to expand the meaning and ambiguity of the work?

As seen from the beginning of the work, Voltaire commits various, repetitive assails against the Catholic Church. For example, as T.S. Eliot, Voltaire included footnotes explaining certain fragments of the text: “Notice how exceedingly discreet our author is. There has so far been no Pope called Urban X. He hesitates to ascribe a bastard to an actual Pope. What discretion! What tender conscience he shows! (Voltaire’s note).” (p. 49). Despite the many attacks and criticisms of Catholicism, Voltaire does not forget to mention his “kindness” in producing soft, subtle attacks on the Catholic faith, attacks which may seem harsh and defying but that in reality are fairly soft when comparing them to the horrors and corruption of the Church. “The reverend fathers own the whole lot, and the people own nothing: that’s what I call a masterpiece of reason and justice. I don’t think I have ever seen such godlike creatures as the reverend fathers.” (p. 62).

The XXIst century has been characterized for the increased amount of sexual allure individuals project when attempting to commercialize a product or having the desire to have “fun”. Promiscuity has risen exponentially with the increase of human freedoms and the shift towards more liberal customs. These elements were certainly not present in the society of the XVIIIth century; however, Voltaire mentions continuous sexual assaults as a very popular way of having fun and spending leisure time. “That flower of maidenhood, which had been reserved for the handsome Prince of Massa-Carrara, was torn from me by the pirate captain, an odious negro, who even fancied he was doing me an honour… But that’s enough: such experiences are so common that they are not worth the trouble of describing.” (p. 51). Just as shocking as the widespread practice of rape is Cunégonde’s carefree reaction towards the loss of her virginity. The psychological horror of the entire experience left no scars on her personality; consequently, Cunégonde felt no regret and was able to continue on with her life. I don’t know whether Voltaire meant to illustrate the lack of honor and pride the individuals of his time reflected in their everyday lives, or whether the author of this satire was simply trying to arouse mankind to react against their meaningless, numb existence. Cunégonde’s lack of emotion and will to protest against a human injustice may be Voltaire’s way of calling our attention and making us realize that everybody is free to think and act as they want. Human will is a reality that must be continually enforced in order to preserve our individuality. In doing so, one’s wishes, desires, emotions, and points of view will be projected towards the world, acknowledging one’s capacity to think and act freely.

Life as an Origami Sculpture: Candide, Chapters IV - IX

Voltaire’s Candide, as Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse Five, portrays a conformist society in which individuals are forced to accept every occurrence as the best and only possible outcome. As the Tralfamadorians explained, the human race possesses a limited view on the reality of the universe, a view that challenges mankind’s ability to question and draw conclusions about particular events. As Pangloss explained, there is a Universal Reason that guides men and helps them develop the appropriate reactions to certain events. “‘This will never do, my friend; you are not obeying the universal rule of Reason; you have misjudged the occasion.’” (p. 34). By acknowledging the existence of an omnipresent force which individuals are free to obey, Voltaire is actually recognizing the capacity of the human race to formulate their own thoughts and inferences based on the mental attributes they possess. This Universal Reason provides a “reasonable” explanation to the events that take place throughout our lifetimes by showing that everything has a determined purpose in life:
“He wanted to throw himself into the sea after the Anabaptist, but the great philosopher, Pangloss, stopped him by proving that Lisbon harbour was made on purpose for this Anabaptist to drown there.” (p. 33).
This quote brings me back to the point I mentioned at the beginning of the entry: conformism. By merely accepting a reality and letting events take their due course, the characters of Voltaire’s Candide are succumbing into an attitude where human free will is permanently overshadowed by their “so it goes” view of reality. The ability to disobey the Universal Reason (like the burglar did) is being completely undermined by Candide’s and Pangloss’s hollow interpretation of events, an explanation that appears to lead to an optimistic view of life but that in reality makes our existence futile and meaningless. “For it is impossible for things not to be where they are, because everything is for the best.” (p. 35).

Based on the previous comments, I can infer that life is like an origami sculpture. Millions of hidden details and explanations lie entwined in between the many curves and folds that coexist together in perfect harmony in order to produce a perfectly balanced and beautiful creation. If we do not dare to unfold the creases in the paper, we will never be able to discover the underlying principles of life and, subsequently, will fail to obtain the plain, wrinkled, clear sheet of paper that serves as the pillar on which our existence rests upon. Our origami sculpture of life will remain untouched by the eager hands of human restlessness. The work of art, intact, will seem promising and optimistic, yet unable to release the potential energy that hides behind its creases. Like Pangloss’s existence, the nicely-folded sheet of paper will look good, but will never be able to yield any valuable teaching. The unfolded sheet of paper, although weary and discouraging, will have managed to wring out life’s juices of knowledge.

Like T.S. Eliot, Voltaire emits a public outcry to protest against the hollow men that attempt to provide a reasonable explanation of life during the so-called “Age of Reason.” These, however, have become alienated from the realities and horrors present in the society of their time, adopting a shallow view of life and its meaning.

URGENT!!

Mr. Tangen, could you please tell Natalia to take that picture off her blog profile? I look like a moron and it lowers my self-esteem.

Religion and War, Society's Evils: Candide, Chapters I - III

It was not difficult to notice the satirical elements in Voltaire’s Candide, which ridicules society and the principles of the universe, religion, and war that existed during the XVIth century. Like Gulliver’s Travels, Candide uses a lot of strange names which are very difficult to pronounce, such as the Baron of Thunder-ten-tronckh and metaphysico-theologo-cosmoloniglogy. I believe Voltaire decided to employ these complicated words in order to mock social pretensions and show that these were completely unnecessary and ridiculous for the development of mankind. Voltaire uses satire in order to appeal to society, especially the higher classes which were the only ones able to understand his humor, by taunting and undermining the ideas of war and religion that existed during that time.

Master Pangloss was instantly portrayed as a brute who taught metaphysico-theologo-cosmoloniglogy, a field of study too absurd to even make sense. During that time, many people used to believe that misfortunes and successes were attributed to God. Since no one could defy the word of God, every event that had taken place or was taking place was always perfect and the best outcome. Since an almighty God had created everything, nothing was useless and everything had a predefined purpose. “… there is no effect without a cause… ‘things cannot be otherwise than as they are; for as all things have been created for some end, they must necessarily be created for the best end. Observe, for instance, the nose is formed for spectacles, therefore we wear spectacles.’” (Chapter 1). Individuals at that time could not accept the fact that something could be wrong, as God was the Creator and he never made mistakes. Human inventions were not made to cure a problem, but rather to exalt God’s beauty and perfection.

This innocent view towards life presented by Pangloss was adapted by Voltaire in order to deride the fact that war, massacres, and death were simply the effect of a cause, and that certainly this effect was always the best outcome.
“After passing over heaps of dying men, the first place he came to was a neighboring village, in the Abarian territories, which had been burned to the ground by the Bulgarians, agreeably to the laws of war. Here lay a number of old men covered with wounds, who beheld their wives dying with their throats cut, and hugging their children to their breasts, all stained with blood. There several young virgins, whose bodies had been ripped open, after they had satisfied the natural necessities of the Bulgarian heroes, breathed their last; while others, half-burned in the flames, begged to be dispatched out of the world. The ground about them was covered with brains, arms, and legs of dead men.” (Chapter 3).
An endless panorama of human suffering and cruelty is described to the reader in a very casual and careless manner. After all, every disaster is the best possible outcome for everybody. Voltaire uses pain, death, and destruction not only to reveal the horrors of war, but also to ridicule mankind’s view of life. He is trying to appeal to the society of his time by emphasizing the difference between a right and a wrong indirectly through the use of irony. Humanity is imperfect, death and suffering still occur, and it is up to us, not God or destiny, to determine what the best outcome actually is. We must rely on human disposition, not submission to religion, in order to judge and act according to what is right or wrong. “Never was anything so gallant, so well accoutred, so brilliant, and so finely disposed as the two armies. The trumpets, fifes, hautboys, drums, and cannon made such harmony as never was heard in Hell itself. The entertainment began by a discharge of a cannon, which, in the twinkling of an eye, laid flat about 6,000 men on each side.” (Chapter 3).

The universe does not revolve around theology. In fact, human goodness is not based on religion, either. Contrary to what was believed during the eve of the Enlightenment, one does not have to believe in the deity of the Pope or repeat the words of the Bible in order to be considered a good, pious person. As Voltaire depicted in his work, individuals were perceiving an erroneous image of God, where people and words were more important than actions, which actually demand a lot more of self-sacrifice and benefit a greater amount of people.
“‘Hark ye, friend,’ said the orator, ‘do you hold the Pope to be Antichrist?’
‘Truly, I never heard anything about it,’ said Candide, ‘but whether he is not, I am in want of something to eat.’
‘Thou deservest not to eat or drink,’ replied the orator, ‘wretch, monster, that thou art! Hence! Avoid my sight, nor ever come near me again while thou livest.’…
A man who had never been christened, an honest Anabaptist named James, was witness to the cruel and ignominious treatment showed to one of his brethren, to a rational, two-footed, unfledged being. Moved with pity he carried him to his own house, caused him to be cleaned… ‘I am infinitely more affected with your extraordinary generosity that with the inhumanity of that gentleman in the black cloak and his wife.’” (Chapter 3).
This passage not only makes a parody of the Bible by making the Catholic man speak like the apostles in the Gospels, but also proposes a secular life. As Candid said, eating, drinking, and staying alive are matters which need to be accomplished independent of whether or not someone is religious. Voltaire proposes a separation of the Church with everyday life, which, according to Candide, is not to be influenced by God-fearing people or ecclesiastical matters. The man with the black cloak that denied to aid Candide is actually a priest (I mean, who else would wear a black cloak?) who, ironically, denies to perform the function that has been assigned to him by God. On the other hand, Voltaire shows that a secular person can, in fact, be good and help other people, arriving to the conclusion that one does not have to be a devout Catholic in order to obey the will of God. Voltaire even goes to the other extreme, up to the point where his satire is used to condemn the clergy and, therefore, advocate a shift of values of the society of his time.

Doublethink and Paranoia in a Misunderstood Life: The Crying of Lot 49

Although The Crying of Lot 49 uses satire in order to ridicule elements in society and create a humorous tone in the novel, Pynchon also employs many objects and people that serve as symbols to portray something important and relevant in society. The characters in the story generally bear names that are ironical, absurd, and contradictory, such as Dr. Hilarious, discussed in previous chapter. But what does this mean? Dr. Hilarious, a shrink, is supposed to cure society from all its pain and suffering; however, Hilarious is probably one of the characters that suffers the most because of his delirium and psychosis. What Pynchon may be trying to say through this individual is that society as a whole is pursuing the wrong purposes and taking the wrong paths in life, which will ultimately lead to nothing. Hilarious represents a person’s tool for achieving a goal, in this case sanity, which is way too corrupted to be able to heal humanity, thus making it achieve a false sense of security. Mankind is pursuing the wrong paths in life, ones that will ultimately lead to a false destination that is only a specter of what we wish to achieve or, as Orwell would have said in 1984, a manifestation of our ability to doublethink.

The Paranoids, another character in the novel, would generally be seen as a ridiculous boy-band that hangs out with girls and sings awkward songs; however, they behaved in a very peculiar and mysterious manner by following Oedipa wherever she went, possibly symbolizing something abstract and invisible but of great importance in her life. “Change your name into Miles, Dean, Serge, and /or Leonard, baby, she advised her reflection in the half-light of that afternoon’s vanity mirror. Either way, they’ll call it paranoia.” (p. 140). The Paranoids were more of a presence rather than a body, a feeling more than something tangible. They were permanently haunting Oedipa wherever she went, constantly reminding her that she carried a burden within herself that followed her everywhere she went, pursued her in her thoughts, and visited her in her dreams. The Paranoids started appearing when Oedipa began her quest of the Trystero and Pierce’s mystery, which is where all of her delirium, nervousness, and questioning about life originated; consequently, the Paranoids, as their name indicates, symbolize one’s psychosis when one decides to question the intricate web of “why’s” and “how’s” in life, ultimately leading to paranoia itself: “The toothaches got worse, she dreamed of disembodied voices from whose malignance there was no appeal, the soft dusk of mirrors out of which something was about to walk, and empty rooms that waited for her.” (p. 144).

Another symbol that caught my attention throughout the entire novel was the WASTE acronym, which is supposed to stand for We Await Silent Trystero’s Empire. Why did Pynchon decide to use the word “waste” as an acronym for the Trystero? One possible approach to this question may be found in what I discussed in my entry for chapter six, which you might want to refer to in order to possess a more complete idea of what I am talking about. The Trystero was a representation of God’s evil, or the Other, which corrupted the Word by establishing a secret web engaged in creating another truth people adhered to. The triumph of evil (Trystero) over good (Thurn and Taxis) fits perfectly into the definition of WASTE, which may be interpreted to signify the decline and deterioration of a civilization that has succumbed to the Other.

Finally, I would like to comment on the significance of Oedipa, the pillar on which the entire novel rested upon. Every time I used the Spell Check in Microsoft Word to revise my typos and spelling mistakes in my entries, I found that another option for spelling Oedipa was the word “oedipal”. This aroused a lot of curiosity in me, as the phonetics of these two words is very similar; besides, I believe that this “discovery” is not a coincidence, as the name Oedipa is not that common and there aren’t any other words that sound like it. The word “oedipal” is derived from Freud’s Oedipus complex, which can be understood as “The complex of emotions aroused in a young child, typically around the age of four, by an unconscious sexual desire for the parent of the opposite sex and a wish to exclude the parent of the same sex.” (Mac Dictionary). As the reader could notice, there weren’t any other major female characters in the novel besides Oedipa, who possessed and immense sex appeal towards men, such as Metzger. According to this theory and its relationship with Oedipa’s name, I can understand that this character behaves like a four-year-old. She has an naïve view of life, shattered when she became engaged in the complex Trystero mystery which, as I said before, tells the reader a lot about life as well. Oedipa may be the representation of those individuals that live a life in a carefree, superficial way (such as Mean Girls… no, I’m kidding). They don’t want to find answers, but once the mystery becomes a door she has to unlock in order to continue on with life, it becomes very difficult for her to arrive at the correct conclusion, never discovering the true reasons that make the mystery keep on going. “He might have written the testament only to harass a one-time mistress, so cynically sure of being wiped out he could throw away all hope of anything more. Bitterness could have run that deep in him. She just didn’t know. He might himself have discovered The Trystero, and encrypted that in the will, buying into just enough to be sure she’d find it. Or he might even have tried to survive death, as a paranoia.” (p. 148). Innocent people like Oedipa will never be able to understand the complexity of their own lives.

Reflections on Life and Death: The Crying of Lot 49

The final pages of the book The Crying of Lot 49 mark the reader the most because they escape the fictitious world in order to give the reader many insights about life. Oedipa never really discovered Pierce’s true intentions with the Trystero mystery. Although this may disappoint the reader, it actually gives us a life lesson much more valuable than the true identity of the stamp bidder or Oedipa’s fate. The novel ends with the words “Oedipa settled back, to await the crying of lot 49.” (p. 152). These few words, contained in the title as well, possess a vast significance. As the mystery unfolded, Oedipa became less and less curious about the outcome of events, until finally, at the auction, she didn’t care at all about what could happen. By saying the words “Oedipa settled back”, Pynchon is actually implying that in life, one must tranquilly wait for events to occur and not fret about what may or may not happen. What matters is the journey, not the final destination. Pierce’s true intentions were never revealed, which shows us that the end does not justify the means, but rather the means justify themselves. Who cares about the truth when you are doing what you think is correct, like Oedipa?

Like the Trystero mail system, life is composed of many hidden truths. There is always a reason, a plan, that explains the outcomes of every major event in life. Fate is not determined by luck or a predestined existence, but rather by a plot someone or something made up in order to alter the course of events. “Look at England, the king about to loose its head. A set-up.” (p. 130). What Pynchon is really trying to say is that everything happens for a reason. Many times we don’t know what this explanation is, and therefore recur to destiny as a justification for the events that happened. Like the Trystero, the real reason behind events is often a mystery which needs to be uncovered; however, the mystery is always there, no matter how difficult it may be to find it.

Death is a reality none of us can avoid, a fact that us humans cannot alter. Throughout the course of history, many men have tried to achieve eternal life, starting with Ponce de Leon’s search for the Fountain of Eternal Youth in Florida, continuing with Harry Potter and the sorcerer’s stone, and finally concluding with all the esthetic surgeries and procedures people subject themselves to today in order to look younger. However, like the Seventh Seal, death is always present. It haunts us everywhere we go, up to the point where it becomes completely unavoidable even in our fantasies. “‘Notice how often the figure of Death hovers in the background.” (p. 125). Although we cannot escape death, we can escape the dullness of life. Many times people break the rules not because they want to achieve a special purpose, but because it makes them feel free and powerful in an existence which will always lead to death. "Onto a network (Trystero) by which X number of Americans are truly communicating whilst reserving their lies, recitations of routine, arid betrayals of spiritual poverty, for the official government delivery system; maybe even onto a real alternative to the exitlessness, to the absence of surprise to life, that harrows the head of every American you know, and you too, sweetie.” (p. 141). People could have their letter delivered in the same way by the U.S. Postal system, but they decide to keep the Trystero alive just because they want to put an edge to their lives and break the pattern of events they would otherwise be subjected to.

Once we die, every memory of our existence is forgotten forever. Pierce managed to prolong his life with the Trystero mystery and his numerous assets around the state; therefore, he will be remembered for a vast amount of time. “…he might even have tried to survive death, as a paranoia… had a plot finally been devised too elaborate for the dark Angel to hold at once …?” (p. 148). Death cannot be avoided, but oblivion can be evaded. The only thing Pynchon tells us to do is to leave a legacy, a mark of our existence in the world which will able everybody to remember us by. Many individuals, such as Jesus, Einstein, and Madame Curie, have been so successful in achieving this purpose that they are known more than most of the people that exist in the world today. “‘Keep it bouncing,’ he’d told her once, ‘that’s all the secret, keep it bouncing.’” (p. 148).