Friday Meeting Re-Cap: Invisible Cities.

Hi Everyone:

Here is a quick re-cap of last Friday’s meeting, which went very well.  We started the meeting with a brief discussion of the differences between AP Language and AP Literature, which I’ll discuss again briefly when school starts, and we also talked about the three writing activities on the AP exam itself, which should not be taken as an indication that the class is going to be test-centered, but as an opportunity to point out what kinds of writing we will be primarily focusing on this year.  The writing on the AP Lit exam isn’t unique to the exam and is transferrable to college-level writing in the humanities.

I then asked the class for their reactions to Invisible Cities, and from there we discussed the book for the rest of the meeting.  Reactions were generally favorable, even when mixed with bemusement or confusion.  One student found the descriptions of the cities to be perplexing but exciting, and she was kept wondering what leaps of invention the author would come up with next.  Another liked the symmetry of the cities, the way elements of the cities mirrored each other and seemed to have an internal logic.  A student commented that she found the cities became increasingly more interesting as the book went on, and the final cities were the most vivid and memorable.  All of these comments struck me as surprising since most years I find that students respond more strongly to the Khan / Polo discussions than the city descriptions, but this year students seemed to like the inventive detail more than the philosophy.

From here I asked some leading questions, e.g. is there a plot?  Is there an internal tension or conflict that is being worked out?  This prompted a response in which one student, who generally liked the book, felt that ultimately nothing in the book spoke to her as a person, and she was wondering if she was missing something.  One student said that she thought that the tension between expanding one’s control or one’s “empire” to the point where it can not be sustained is a central problem; there is nothing one can do to stop the corruption that builds up beyond one’s reach.  Another student felt that the tension between being immersed in the concrete detail of life (symbolized by Polo) and working with abstractions (symbolized by Khan) was at the root of things.  I offered that the book seems to be working out the limitations of language and storytelling.  How do we get across experience: through concrete detail, through emblematic or symbolic gestures?  Can the complexity of experience even be told directly or must it be suggested?

We talked about many other issues: representations of women in the book, the dual impulses of fear and desire that run through the book, the fact that the book subtly encourages the reader to side with Polo, and the depth of the last paragraph of the book. 

If you could not join us, please add your comments on any of these issues in the comment box below, and explain yourself as fully as you can.  Thanks for reading, Mr. Telles.