There is a cell and a scene out its window, except it's actually a theater tableau in a play depicting a city's mythological past. Or perhaps it's not a myth at all, since, in the city's streets, scenes from the myth seem to be recurring with only slight alteration. Myth becomes city becomes theater becomes myth, and on the cycle goes.
Walking through a silent mansion populated by sleepwalkers, a dream of youth and beauty is muted by a languorous ambiance with a vaguely sinister undertone.
Strange murders lead to a dilapidated building, the jumbled past of which suggests perversions of love, but now it may be the site of much darker events.
Imprisoned in a room, in a mirror, in a photograph, in an eye. A chain of crass games, playful cruelty, transformations and incestuous love.
In Topology of a Phantom City you walk these strange settings, then walk them again after they have been newly twisted. Does this sound interesting to you? If it does, be warned: I've marked this review as containing spoilers because the exploration of these settings is the entirety of this work, don't pick it up expecting any more. Although perhaps “entirety” is unfair, perhaps there is some sort of overarching plot to piece together in the dreamlike sections that Alain Robbe-Grillet presents. After all, there are certainly recurring elements, including but not limited to Vanadis, barred windows, vermillion blood pools, pages torn out of an exercise book floating in water, and screams. I didn’t find that they coalesced into anything greater than the sum of their parts, though. This is one of those books where I let the prose wash over me, and enjoyed it as an aesthetic experience more than anything else. I see why, in that capacity, someone might truly adore Topology of a Phantom City.
I, on the other hand, liked it but didn’t love it. Through no fault of its own this work suffers in comparison to a book that I recently reread, Italo Calvino’s Invisible Cities. I couldn’t help but compare Calvino’s vignettes of phantasmal metropolises (that’s the right word, I checked) to Robbe-Grillet’s, and I ended up finding the latter wanting. I can easily see someone reaching the opposite conclusion and preferring Robbe-Grillet’s lengthier descriptions, or finding the more menacing tone of the work more evocative than the melancholy whimsy of Invisible Cities, but I can only rate a book from my own perspective.
Robbe-Grillet’s prose is quite good, and he uses it here to spin evocative descriptions of a city somewhere on the edge between dream and nightmare. I enjoyed reading it, though it’s not the best example of this micro-niche subgenre that I happen to have read recently. Thus I give this one a 3.5/5, rounding down.
P.S. Coming back to this work less than three months later, I can barely remember it. I understand that it has a dream-like atmosphere, but most works that strike the same tone still manage to stick with me. For whatever reason Topology of a Phantom City had absolutely no staying power, so I'm lowering the score slightly to a 3/5.