Traveller’s Comments (group member since Sep 15, 2013)

Traveller’s comments from the Foucault's Pendulum group.

A bit on Abraham ben Samuel Abulafia, the founder of the school of "Prophetic Kabbalah", who was born in Zaragoza, Spain, in 1240.

Of special importance for understanding his messianology are his “prophetic books” written between 1279 (in Patras) and 1288 (in Messina), in which revelations including apocalyptic imagery and scenes are interpreted as pointing to spiritual processes of inner redemption. The spiritualized understanding of the concepts of messianism and redemption as an intellectual development represents a major contribution of the messianic ideas in Judaism. As part of his messianic propensity, Abulafia become an intense disseminator of his Kabbalah, orally and in written form, trying to convince both Jews and Christians.

Abulafia developed a sophisticated theory of language, which assumes that Hebrew represents not so much the language as written or spoken as the principles of all languages, namely the ideal sounds and the combinations between them. Thus, Hebrew as an ideal language encompasses all the other languages. This theory of language might have influenced Dante Alighieri (who wrote The Divine Comedy ).

I'm afraid my sources are not very academic: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_...

I'm hoping some of you can point to more academic sources for this interesting trend in Medieval scholarship.
I'm guessing Eco would have made his acquaintance with Abulafia during his Medieval studies.

I found a bit on Abulafia in this piece on Gershom Scholem at the Stanford site: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sch...

I think for my own sake even if for nobody else's , I'm going to want to tease out the main narrative from amongst all Eco's meanderings:

The first four chapters:

The novel begins with the main character and narrator, Casaubon, looking for a hiding place in the Conservatoire des Arts et Metiers in Paris. We have no idea what is really going on: the narrator (whose name we later find out is Causabon) seems to be wanting to hide in the museum until closing time so that he can be alone in the museum in order to witness some sort of event the nature of which is not initially revealed to us.

The narrator embarks on a flashback and we notice that we have four characters who seem to be working in an office in Milan together with the narrator: Gudrun, Diotallevi and Jacopo Belbo, [both from Piedmont ;)] and the narrator Casaubon.

Something bad happens to Belbo while on the phone with Casaubon - who had captured Belbo? The Rosicrucians? The Comte de Saint-Germain? The Okhrana? The Knights of the Temple? The Assassins? (Who the heck are The Assassins even?)

And who is Lorenza Pelligrini? Sounds like Belpo's love interest.
Also, why is Diotavelli in hospital?

Basically all that happens in the main plot up to chapter 5, is that Casaubon goes to Belpo's apartment where their office PC resides, where he tries to crack Belpo's password to get access to his files.

However, Eco cracks quite a few jokes on his way through the narrative. He embroiders quite a bit on the forgiving nature of digital memory.

I enjoyed his splat joke, but I do have a taste for black humor.

Of course we do have to remember that the novel was published in 1988 when personal computers were still in their infancy. Note that Eco often calls it a "word processor" but it's clearly a PC since it can accommodate BASIC programs separate from the word-processing software.
Eco also makes a nod to Proust and "In search of lost memory[/time]" plays on Proust's novel "Remembrance of Things Past" or À la recherche du temps perdu, Tome I

Eco also keeps making nods to Noir detective fiction with his references to Philip Marlowe and Sam Spade.

In chapter 5 and 6 Eco shows off his knowledge of Temurah, gematria, factor analysis and so forth. As far as it concerns the plot, we find out that Casaubon has learned something quite astounding and/or disturbing after finally cracking Belbo's password in a quite humoristic way.

Btw, I couldn't help thinking of those anagram and crossword apps one gets for free on the internet these days.
Phew, but computers were slow back in 1988! :)

..and that's about it as far as the plot goes up to this point, I'd say.

The rest is all Geeky stuff for us to ruminate over. :D

Denise wrote: "I saw a post about this group a few days ago and decided it must be a sign. I was going to start this book at the first of the year, by myself, but now I can start early and have a chance at unders..."

It's a sign, Denise, it's a sign. :) Welcome to the group!

Aloha wrote: "Eco is an atheist but masterfully used the Kabbalist numerology in this book. Terrific stuff. I'm going to have to look back on these 8 chapters. I can only pop in on weekends since my weekdays are exhausting. I'll make a huge effort to keep up with the reading, though, since the content is thrilling. My veins are pumping with anticipation!
"
Yeah, he had a Catholic upbringing, which he rejected sometime during his university studies.

Don't forget we have some goodies in our background thread, btw! https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...
Please feel free to post more in it at any time. :)

Thanks, Jan-Maat. My copy of FP was translated by Weaver. I must be on the lookout for his translations. I wonder if my translation of Calvino's If on a Winter's Night a Traveler was by him? Yes, it is. :)

Here is a link for more about Lavoisier, the founder of modern chemistry, with some images of his equipment that the narrator of this first part sees in the museum: http://www.artsense.eu/use-cases/labo...

And here is a close-up of the mirrors he mentions:

Cool, guys, I hope you still remember a bit of that when we get to the heretical stuff, since I for one, probably won't have time to read those books in time to inform this book... :)

Anyway, since the main discussion hasn't started yet, quickly want to post some links in regard to some background material. We have a separate thread for that, but it seems as if people aren't going to be too bothered with the separate thread, so I may as well post it in this thread?

It's about the Laboratory of Lavoisier and his mirrors.

Here is a link for more about Lavoisier, the founder of modern chemistry, with some images of his equipment that the narrator of this first part sees in the museum: http://www.artsense.eu/use-cases/labo...

And here is a close-up of the mirrors he mentions:

Cool, great to see all you guys coming with. I'm guessing you're all going to be a great help, I'm grateful so many people who have already read it and has so much background will be helping people like myself and Dolors who haven't read this before, and speaking for myself, whose knowledge of medieval arcana isn't exactly cutting-edge.
I think we're going to have fun.

Aloha wrote: "All the geeky element was gone, though. I'm reading the unabridged this morning and seeing that I would have missed all the stuff I love. "
Heh, see? There's so much geeky stuff that I don't even know where to begin unravelling it... P

Ah, I see! Abridging it for an audiobook does make sense.

Well, I'm glad you're joining us in any case. How long are you going to be driving for? No time off for Thanksgiving and Xmas?

Thanks, Jonfaith!

The bits I quoted came from Wikipedia, which obviously stole some from the Stanford article, which is of course the more reputable source. :) I must remember to use it rather.

Cool Aloha! Wait.. there's an abridged version of this?
In any case, if you read the abridged you'd miss out on the nerdiness, ha ha.

Yes, the philology explanation certainly would make sense, and would cover his interests in medieval aesthetics, in medieval heresies, in literary criticism and narratology and in the interpretation and analysis of texts, in (mass) media studies, and in semiology/semiotics.

We were wondering about Eco's academic background in the first thread. Apparently, his interest in medieval studies came first, and his interest in semiotics only came later.

According to Wikipedia:
His father was the son of a family with thirteen children, and urged Umberto to become a lawyer, but he entered the University of Turin in order to take up medieval philosophy and literature, writing his thesis on Thomas Aquinas and earning his Laurea in philosophy in 1954.

Who knows if his education with the Salesians had anything to do with it?

In any case: In 1959, he published his second book, The Development of Medieval Aesthetics, which established Eco as a formidable thinker in medieval philosophy. [...]

About the Middle Ages, he wrote that there was "a geometrically rational schema of what beauty ought to be, and on the other [hand] the unmediated life of art with its dialectic of forms and intentions", the two cut off from one another as if by a pane of glass.

Eco's work in literary theory has changed focus over time.

Initially, he was one of the pioneers of "Reader Response". Hmm, interesting. I met with the latter form of lit crit through Wayne Booth and Roland Barthes.

He only seems to have become interested in semiotics in the late sixties and early seventies.

Derek (Guilty of thoughtcrime) wrote: "Damn! Apparently I'm going to need some wisdom.…"

Well, if you'll at least supply the doctrine and learning... ;D

..but hoo, boy, the quote is a forewarning indeed. Per Wikipedia,

Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa von Nettesheim (15 September 1486 – 18 February 1535) was a German magician, occult writer, theologian, astrologer, and alchemist.
[...]
Sidebar:(view spoiler)[
During his wandering life in Germany, France and Italy he worked as a theologian, physician, legal expert and soldier.

He was for some time in the service of Maximilian I, probably as a soldier in Italy, but devoted his time mainly to the study of the occult sciences and to problematic theological legal questions, which exposed him to various persecutions through life, usually in the mode described above: He would be privately denounced for one sort of heresy or another. [...] (hide spoiler)]

There is no evidence that Agrippa was seriously accused, much less persecuted, for his interest in or practice of magical or occult arts during his lifetime, apart from losing several positions.

I wonder why Eco is so apparently obsessed with heresies through the Middle Ages; he is a semiotician, for Pete's sake. Perhaps heresies were what he actually wanted to spec in, and maybe there were too many people in that field already? *shrug* ...or perhaps studying symbolism and codes inherent in culture somehow led him to focus on how these operated in the Middle Ages?

Ah, no, his interest in Medieval studies came first, and semiotics only came later.

Wait, let me post the relevant bit I found on Wikipedia in the background thread, shall I?

Heh, okay, now you're making me purchase some sports drinks and water bottles.

I see that not only should we be getting ready our running shoes and our water bottles, but also our detective equipment. I feel like I should be borrowing Sherlock Holmes's magnifying glass. And getting my puzzle-building skills out of the box.

Just as an appetizer, I'm going to quote Eco's very first quote at the start of the book. It comes before chapter one starts:

Only for you, children of doctrine and learning, have we written this work. Examine this book, ponder the meaning we have dispersed in various places and gathered again; what we have concealed in one place we have disclosed in another, that it may be understood by your wisdom

--Heinrich Cornelius Agrippa von Nettesheim, De occulta philosophia, 3, 65

Does that sound like a warning or a clue? :D

For those who had already peeked at the first thread, I apologize for erroneously allocating too many chapters to the first thread. The first thread will be for discussion of chapters 1 through to end of 6. (Pages 3 to 45 in my edition).
So we need to read to the end of chapter 6 for that. They're very short chapters (though full of all sorts of goodies).
The thread is here: https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

I thought we should make the first portion small just to find our feet while everybody is finishing up their other reads and commitments and getting started on this, which we can't all do at exactly the same time, of course. :)

For discussion of Foucault's Pendulum, Chapter 17 through end of Chapter 27.

For discussion of Foucault's Pendulum, Chapter 7 through to end of Chapter 16.

We've started picking up on Eco's pranks.
Of course, the most obvious prank in this section, is in Chapter 11, (view spoiler)[ the Hamlet one. I also had to smile at the fact that Belbo wasn't interested in hearing about Romeo and Juliet. Of course the reference to Kierkegaard, and the existential tones in Hamlet and the 'to be or not to be' was quite brilliant. (hide spoiler)]

More pranks and riffery takes place with the cretins and the fools in chapter 10. (view spoiler)[ When Eco refers to St Anselm's argument in favor of the existence of God, he is sort of poking fun on more than one level, because part of St Anselm's argument goes:

"Then is there no such nature, since the fool has said in his heart: God is not? But certainly this same fool, when he hears this very thing that I am saying - something than which nothing greater can be imagined - understands what he hears; and what he understands is in his understanding, even if he does not understand that it is. For it is one thing for a thing to be in the understanding and another to understand that a thing is.

Gaunilo of Marmoutiers illustrated the apparent illogical aspects of some of the aspects of Anselm's argument in his analogy of The Lost Island, and his reply is often spoken of (in an ironic way) as "the reply from the fool"

Personally I find Gaunilo's argument a lot more convincing than that of St Anselm, the latter which rests totally on the assumption that God exists in the first place. So I had to giggle a bit when Belbo calls both their arguments 'fool's arguments'. But then, at the end of the chapter, Eco has Belbo close off with : "Everything I've said to you so far is false." *sigh* (hide spoiler)]

I've realized that the entire Chapter 11 is a reference to other works, but I can't quite lay my finger on all of them. I'm hoping other group members will be sharper and will have spotted a few more.

In any case, I wonder if Seven Seas Jim is a mixture of Lord Jim by Joseph Conrad (since there is also mention of "Kurz" the antagonist in Conrad's novel Heart of Darkness, and perhaps Treasure Island ?

Ah, sorry about that. In context, we are in the postmodern era now. In the era of digital information and globalization.

The era of industrialization was the "modern" era. in which 'modernist' fiction was written, ( J. Joyce, Ezra Pound, V.Woolf, (Bloomsbury group) TS Eliot, Beckett, Kafka, etc. etc) and other arts, such as music (Benjamin Britten, Bela Bartok, Stavinsky etc) and architechture also attained the 'modern' label in this era.
Postmodernism.. well, let me quote from one of my favorite books (Literary Movements for Students )

Postmodernism is the name given to the period of literary criticism that developed toward the end of the twentieth century.Just as the name implies, it is the period that comes after the modern period. But these are not easily separated into discrete units with specific dates as Postmodernism came about as a reaction to the established modernist era, which itself was a reaction to the established tenets of the nineteenth century and before.

What sets Postmodernism apart from its predecessor is the reaction of its practitioners to the rational, scientific, and historical aspects of the modern age. For postmodernists this took the guise of being self-conscious, experimental, and ironic.

The postmodernist is concerned with imprecision and unreliability of language and with epistemology, the study of what knowledge is.

Postmodern authors include: William Gaddis, John Hawkes, William Burroughs, Kurt Vonnegut, John Barth, Donald Barthelme, Jerzy Kosinski, Don DeLillo, David Foster Wallace, Jorge Luis Borges, Thomas Pynchon (though the latter is often described as 'high modern'. There's lots more, of course, I named just a few.

...and then you start reading Catherynne M. Valente, and what I just said about genres, goes completely out of the window.

Of course, mixing genres is the po-mo in thing, and some people do it very well...

Hmmmm... I think what might play with my head, is that I like my SF and and my fantasy in their place, in their own genre. When I started watching Lost, I had thought the show was going to be based on reality, (more or less, or rather horror really than fantasy) so bringing in fantasy/SF elements breaks the whole atmosphere for me. :(

Not that I don't love SF and fantasy, but I need to visualize the universe I'm reading about, as in being in the SFF genre from the beginning--not sure if I'm explaining myself well there.

Actually, I wonder if FP is going to break the boundaries and 'go there'. Funny enough, just from reading the blurb, I wouldn't be too surprised...