Miévillians discussion
This topic is about
The City & the City
The City & The City Discussion
>
SECTION 2: Chapters 4-6
As far as point 1 goes (and I will try to be vague to avoid spoilers) - I'm realizing how much more grating the division between the two cities is for me this time around. I think I stand with the unificationists. It's so frustrating to see how people pursue and emphasize their differences and reject things that would bring them together. Go Beszélqoma!
Me too. It sounds like the name of a soccer/football team.As we approach the end of the book, I would like to ask the question how you see this talk of boundaries and divisions fitting into CM's politics, particularly international politics and revolutionary groups.
I'm happy if you want to post something in the last thread now, but I think it's premature to deal with it here.
If you want to, just mention here that we've done that.
Ian wrote: "I'm happy if you want to post something in the last thread now, but I think it's premature to deal with it here."I think I will wait until I finish the reread, just to make sure I remember everything about this book as clearly as possible. I'm really trying to focus on everything I may have missed or misunderstood the first time around.
Sorry, N, I mistakenly thought this was in the first folder. Does it make sense to leave this discussion here? It certainly raises the issue of politics.
I've had a look at the other folders and am happy to leave this discussion here, as long as the events at the end of the novel in Section 10 are not foreshadowed here.So here is about the abstract politics and international relations, not how these issues are dealt with in the actual plot.
Let me know if this doesn't make sense or you disagree.
I hadn't seen your #4, when I wrote the above. Happy to discuss politics when you're ready.
Ian wrote: "So here is about the abstract politics and international relations, not how these issues are dealt with in the actual plot."Abstract is always fine. I cannot help but relate some of the events that I see in this book to what I know about national pride and national identity in the Motherland - the post-Soviet Eastern Europe and such. I have seen firsthand how the attempts to emphasize and establish your national identity, your differences that make you a nation can lead to appalling hate and intolerance for others; how in the quest to self-define and point out the difference from the others a population can come to the open conclusion that it means that they are somehow better and superior than the others, and that it's okay to think and assume that you are somehow superior to others based on the country you belong to and the language you speak. I have noticed that many times the idea of national pride gets confused with the idea of 'hating thy neighbor', especially when there is a history of past conflicts between said neighbors. This book just makes me reflect on that.
N, I hope I don't offend you by saying this, but when Communism collapsed, I hoped that the Soviet Union and Yogoslavia would remain intact as sovereign nations.My reason was that the European Union was pointing to political and administrative formations above the one nation or region as the or a way for the future.
Instead, both splintered - it had always been said that only Tito could hold Yugoslavia together.
I think both have to go through a period of self-discovery, before they could ever reunite, if there is any chance of that - probably not, because the enmities are ancient.
It's interesting that here the only way the enmity between some of these groups in our football competition was minimised was when they were forced to amalgamate to have one team from each state in a national competition.
They had to combine to beat a common enemy - the teams from the other states.
The thing is, I love their food, their culture, their music, their passion for life - why can't they just stop fighting?
I suppose we have to deal with the issue of just how symbolic or allegorical TC&TC is.If we were simply talking about two cities (without the Breach), then the analogies might be more obvious.
However, is there an analogy for the Breach where two cities or nations separately cede authority to a third force, admittedly in order to enforce a separation of the first two?
Would this be like splitting one city or nation in two, under UN supervision?
I don't get the impression he is attacking the UN, whether as a peace-keeping force or something supra-sovereign.
But he might be...
I'm sure there are people, even on GR, who think the UN is a giant conspiracy...
This is where the novel takes on aspects of The Da Vinci Code, but in a far more intelligent and literary way.
Plotwise, I enjoyed chapters 4 and 5 rather more than 1-3: a little lighter on detection, and rather more about history, politics, language and people's lives. Regarding analogies for the cities, even if you ignore Breach, you can't really ignore Orciny, in which case (from what I've read so far), I can't really think of any close parallel.
Do you think history, politics, language and people's lives is ultimately what CM wanted to write about in TC&TC, and that the crime aspect of the novel is just a peg to hang his hat on, part of his goal of writing books in a number of different genres?Either way, any thoughts on just how convincing has appropriation of the crime genre is?
Is he any better than a dilettante when it comes to crime?
Nataliya wrote: "As far as point 1 goes (and I will try to be vague to avoid spoilers) - I'm realizing how much more grating the division between the two cities is for me this time around..."I agree. The pacifist in me just wants to say, get over it and get together, rejoin. And I'm having a harder time believing the division is supernatural, or more than willful. First read, I keyed on the word "alter" as in alternate reality - my answer to Ian's question 6 - that there's more than just learning how to unsee and practicing to get it right and do it deliberately. But I'm finding it harder to think that this time. Maybe it could be all politics, centuries of schism a result of hard-headedness. Then again, the mind's a powerful and misunderstood thing ...
Strange as it may sound, I'm reminded of a line from Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows when Harry asks if he's dreaming or it's real and Dumbledore says: "Of course it's all in your head, Harry, but what makes you think it's not real?"
Ian wrote: "N, I hope I don't offend you by saying this, but when Communism collapsed, I hoped that the Soviet Union and Yogoslavia would remain intact as sovereign nations.My reason was that the European Un..."
At the risk of causing the wrath of so many people from those countries that once were one and now split into so many little countries - I agree with the overall sentiment (whether it would have ever been realistic is a whole different question). It baffles me how the natural human instinct seems to be using freedom to blame your neighbors for everything and immediately look for something that sets you apart. I appreciate the efforts of the European Union at some sort of unification of traditionally divided Europe so much - because I applaud any attempts to look at what we have in common vs. what makes us different. When so frequently we can say just what the unificationists in this book have been saying - it's basically the same damn country and the same damn language, and what's the point in staying separated?
Ian wrote: "However, is there an analogy for the Breach where two cities or nations separately cede authority to a third force, admittedly in order to enforce a separation of the first two?
Would this be like splitting one city or nation in two, under UN supervision?
I don't get the impression he is attacking the UN, whether as a peace-keeping force or something supra-sovereign."
Interesting take here, Ian. I agree - I don't think he's attacking the UN or any other organization of the sort. It does seem that the displeasure lies with the desire of states/people to be divided.
@ Cecily - the idea of Orciny was so fascinating to me on my first red-through! It's very Miéville-surreal.
Allen wrote: "Strange as it may sound, I'm reminded of a line from Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows when Harry asks if he's dreaming or it's real and Dumbledore says: "Of course it's all in your head, Harry, but what makes you think it's not real?""The Solipsism and the Solipsism?
The Solipsity and the Solipsity?
Out on my walk, but don't they speak two different languages?At some point, I'd like to raise the unificationist drive behind the DöplirCaffé.
ETA: See the discussion in Section 1.
I'm really focusing on Borlu the person (and inspector) this time around ... And really thought the end of Chapter 4 was interesting, where he says: "I always wanted to live where I could watch foreign trains." That combined with his admission in Chapter 5 that even if he were a student of the Cleavage he would still not know what happened. Maybe he doesn't want to know. You wonder, too, if that's because he's an investigator, who as a profession is trained to notice every single detail around him. Maybe he's naturally inclined to side with the unificationists or maybe there's something divided about himself that he doesn't like. He really is more complicated than I remember. So yeah, I think Mieville's using the crime genre as a vehicle to write about the people and political change. Specifically a hard-boiled crime drama. I've not read many other crime authors outside Chandler, Hammett and Arthur Conan Doyle, but Borlu is definitely, maybe blatantly, Marlowe (even sounds the same) ... Big tough guy gets in over his head, but he's about justice and truth (view spoiler)
But wouldn't he have to qualify as a dilettante since he's written only one crime novel, and he patterned it after a genre? Not being pious, just wonder what others think.
By the way, I had been and am poised to learn about the political overtones in this book. Sad to say I'm very unstudied in world politics ... Thank you Ian and Nataliya for beginning my education!
Ian wrote: "Out on my walk, but don't they speak two different languages?At some point, I'd like to raise the unificationist drive behind the doppelcaffee."
I thought they did. Then I came across this bit in the phone conversation between Borlu and his unexpected informant: "It's the same damn-faced language anyway." And then Borlu talks about the languages being closely related while at the same time saying that they bear no resemblance to each other. I found that quite interesting - which is it? Is it more of the imagined distinction between two rather similar languages with people deliberately emphasizing the difference?
Allen wrote: " That combined with his admission in Chapter 5 that even if he were a student of the Cleavage he would still not know what happened. Maybe he doesn't want to know."I interpreted this phrase as the impossibility to learn the truth since it's forbidden and buried, and even students of history are not allowed access to the real facts so that they do not disrupt the equilibrium. And this idea of permanence of division is very much ingrained into the minds of people who have mastered unseeing, unhearing and unsmelling.
Nataliya wrote: "Ian wrote: "Out on my walk, but don't they speak two different languages?At some point, I'd like to raise the unificationist drive behind the doppelcaffee."
I thought they did. Then I came acros..."
I wonder whether the two languages originated from the one, but split over time?
I can't remember, so this might be wildly inaccurate, but did Arabic and Hebrew (the Semitic languages) have a common origin?
Ian wrote: "Out on my walk, but don't they speak two different languages?..."Yes... and no. The alphabets are different, but the languages are more similar than is acceptable to admit.
The telephone informant that Nataliya quotes is in chapter 4, and Borlu takes his comment as significant.
Chapter 5 opens with an explanation of the origin of the different scripts.
Cecily wrote: "Ian wrote: "Out on my walk, but don't they speak two different languages?..."Yes... and no. The alphabets are different, but the languages are more similar than is acceptable to admit.
The tele..."
Right. It talks about the Cyrillic alphabet of Beszél and Roman letters replacing the Arabic-like script of Ul Qoma language. And yet it seemed to me that there were more similarities than differences.
So you're a Unificationist? ;)
Cecily wrote: "So you're a Unificationist? ;)"Apparently. There are at least two quasi-Central European imaginary countries where I would not be welcome ;)
Wouldn't that be interesting, that the sound is very similar, but the method of transcription is quite different.
Nataliya wrote: "Apparently. There are at least two quasi-Central European imaginary countries where I would not be welcome ;)"In the same city? I have a soft spot for Buda and Pest, though I've never been there in real life.
Ian wrote: "Wouldn't that be interesting, that the sound is very similar, but the method of transcription is quite different."Chinese is the opposite: the writing system is more or less the same throughout the country (though Hong Kong uses the more complex and traditional version, whereas the mainland uses a simplified version), but the spoken language is unintelligible between regions.
I love learning about things like this. Thanks.
Ian wrote: "The Solipsity and the Solipsity?"Funny! I like that.
Nataliya wrote: "I interpreted this phrase as the impossibility to learn the truth since it's forbidden and buried, and even students of history are not allowed access to the real facts ..."Good point. Had not considered it from that perspective. Then that would be another reason the informant and the unificationists are so nervous and claim that it's all so ridiculous? That the equilibrium is not the important thing?
Allen's comment makes me wonder whether the Breach is also symbolic of God.Some believe and adhere, some don't believe, but either way we all have a sneaking suspicion that we might get to the end of our lives and discover that God was a reality (or not).
And God, whether or not (S)He exists, casts a long shadow over our lives.
Cecily wrote: "Ian wrote: "Wouldn't that be interesting, that the sound is very similar, but the method of transcription is quite different."Chinese is the opposite: the writing system is more or less the same ..."
Interesting. Didn't realize that exaclty. Especially since it's regional like the setting of our book, since isolation tends to increase regional language differences. I wonder, is the Chinese region to region unintelligible because they use different words or different dialects, or tones, or the whole language?
I'm reminded of pidgin forms of English, which develop to bridge the gap between two languages, then once that becomes a native language its termed a creole, and often hard for either speaker of the original languages. I wonder if our book residents' language is like French and French Creole in Louisiana? Understandable but quite different. Sorry, geeking out on this!
Can I tell another OT story? Please?In New Guinea in the 1950's, a man was charged with murder.
Because his dialect was so distant from English, they had to get a succession of translators to translate from one language to another, until finally there was someone at the end who could translate from Pidgin into English.
There ended up being eight translators.
Even with this logistical difficulty, the man was found guilty and hanged.
Many years later, it was discovered that a man from a neighbouring tribe had committed the murder.
He was also the first in line in the chain of translation, next to the accused and sending his version of events up the chain for translation.
Allen wrote: "...I wonder, is the Chinese region to region unintelligible because they use different words or different dialects, or tones, or the whole language?..."An unsatisfactory answer, but I think it's a bit of both.
9. A political meeting takes place in Copula Hall.Oh, for heaven's sake. I've been reading that all along as Cupola hall, and having visions of something baroque, while Ian's seeing "bordello"!
Nataliya wrote: "'It's the same damn-faced language anyway.'"
Darn, you Nataliya. I wanted to be the one to bring that up, but I'm late to chapter 4. Obviously I need to read faster.
I hadn't got to seeing that they use Cyrillic on one side & Roman on the other, but this is another similarity to Yugoslavia. Serbo-Croatian is one language, written in Cyrillic by Serbs and Latin by Croats (and I don't remember how Bosnians & Montenegrins write it - but they also speak the same language). The description of the phone conversation suggests perhaps they are speaking different dialects. I was born in South London, then lived in the Northwest of England, and my parents could barely understand either of my dialects (but that's not my fault - THEY were almost Geordies - monkey-hangers, actually), but "it's the same damn-faced language!" Naturally, to be able to talk to my parents, we all had to switch out of dialect (I've almost never heard either of my parents speak in their native dialect), and I guess this is what Borlú and his informant do - though how, or why, either of them even learn the other's dialect is intriguing.
Derek's comments highlight the importance of the knowledge we bring to a novel from our own experience.Are we starting to arrive at a synthesis of ideas about the cultural and linguistic differences between the two cities?
Would anybody like to attempt a point form summary?
Does it matter?
Should we not be trying to "ground" the novel in our real world?
Ian wrote: "...Should we not be trying to "ground" the novel in our real world? "I can see why some want to, and that's fine, but I don't feel the need to pin it down too precisely, though that's partly because my knowledge of the likely candidates is a little too skimpy.
Cecily wrote: "Ian wrote: "...Should we not be trying to "ground" the novel in our real world? "I can see why some want to, and that's fine, but I don't feel the need to pin it down too precisely, though that's..."
I agree. I'm obsessed, but nobody else needs to be :-)
You can give people time? I thought it just disappeared. Maybe they're stealing it from me?
It's just lost in the crosshatches.
At this stage in my first read I was hopelessly confused. I was trying to work out how "unseen", which I thought was paranormal in some way, fitted into a detective novel. Second read I can see how beautifully the clues are scattered, in plain sight, yet camouflaged.
I'm back here pondering over the word "Cleavage". Looks Copula it has several meanings. In the context of the story CM has selected the definition of "to split apart"' The more common usage that we all know is that lovely spot where a women's breasts come together when wearing low cut apparel. Why is Mieville playing with these words? For the fun of flirting with his readers? I think the Clevege is like forbidden fruit. The more we un see the more we want to look.
Annie, Mieville explicitly plays with both non-breast-related meanings of "cleavage" (to split or to cling together). For example, in chapter 8, "Whichever theory you subscribe to on Clevage, split or convergence, what we're looking for predates it."
However, I'm sure the breast-related meaning tickles his fancy as well.
This was the section of the book where I finally (on the second start) worked out wtf was going on. It burst on me like an epiphany, and I was so overwhelmed by the brilliance of the idea and all it meant in terms of OUR behaviour, that I didn't look for any deeper meaning.There has been so much discussion about various subtexts, and Ian's points for discussion are so diverse, its all a bit overwhelming.
But I would like to comment on the word "Cleavage", for me it speaks of a splitting, a separation - obviously we have the physical, cultural and linguistic separations, but we have thought and sensory separation in terms of seeing and unseeing, hearing and unhearing etc. This reminds me of schizophrenia and other psychotic states - in which there is a separation(cleavage) between reality and perception. It is as if the whole population has broken and entered a state of psychosis. And the most fascinating thing is that the reason has not even been considered, it just is. (yes I know there are theories eg splitting and convergence, but it doesnt come into anyone's everyday life. They accept completely this insane reality.)
P.S. I'm not sure if it would be useful to document the differences between the two cities - does anyone thing they have a meaning deeper than just their actual existance? ie the purpose is just to have two different cities with different cultures and there is no extra meaning in the details?And on the language: perhaps it IS the same language essentially but they hear it differently depending if it is spoken by UQ or BZ inhabitants - just as they see differently, etc.
There are at least a couple of places where someone expresses the heretical view that the languages are fundamentally the same, but with different alphabets, so I think you're right: the need for translations etc is just a variant of unhearing/unseeing.
It would make more sense this way. That they are essentially one people but deliberately perceive it otherwise.
Miévillians
Books mentioned in this topic
The Fifth Head of Cerberus (other topics)Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (other topics)
1. We start to get the language of "another country" and "foreign".
2. "Breach" and "crosshatch" are mentioned again.
3. In chapter 5, CM mentions "the Cleavage".
What do you think of this term for the division of the city at the heart of the novel and its title?
Why should we be prohibited from looking at or seeing the Cleavage or at least both sides of the Cleavage?
4. A bit part belongs to "Drodin". Is it coincidence that one of Jeff VanderMeer's characters is called "Dradin"?
5. We learn about a third city, Orciny.
6. CM uses the terms total, alter and crosshatched.
What do you think about how these terms have been insinuated into the text so far?
Are you getting a sense of what they mean from the context?
Is there ever a detailed explanation in one place?
7. The instinctual response to "unsmell".
8. In chapters 5 and 6, we start to get details of some of the politics involved.
9. A political meeting takes place in Copula Hall.
The resemblance of this name to "copulate" is bizarre, but the origin of the latter term reveals that "copulare" means "to join together".
The sexual connotation of copulate appeared several centuries later.
Copula Hall houses the Oversight Committee.
The term "oversight" always amuses me, because it can mean both to oversee (or look over) and to overlook.
10. The Breach is explained as a ceding of sovereignty to another authority.
The two cities resent it.
11. CM creates the neologism "grosstopically" twice in chapter 6.
What do you think it means?
12. The collection had quickly been given some name, but I could not remember it. It included an astrolabe and a geared thing, some intricate complexity as madly specific and untimed as the Antikythera mechanism, to which as many dreams and speculations had attached, and the purpose of which, similarly, no one had been able to reconstruct.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikyth...