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

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

Re Belbo's files and the shocking discoveries of historical personalities.

That chapter was brilliant and hilarious, not only did Belbo point out John Dee's clairvoyant Edward Kelly as the true and secret author of the Shakespeare plays, but he also ascribed Bacon as meaning to create a false historical trail that would make it look like he wrote them. And that got me thinking that Eco shows Bacon in fairly bad light, there's an impression of an evil and power-hungry, highly manipulative man who murdered John Dee, abused Elizabeth I and tried to steal the authorship of another author. I wonder if there are some hidden intentions/criticism in libelling these characters in this fashion.

I also found it remarkable the way some chapters ended with a link to the Kabbalah of each section and that this one was linked to Tifereth, the sefirot which represents "beauty" and "glory", which matches Lorenza's (need for wisdom) appeal. Difficult not to succumb into temptation!

Lia was also my favorite character and I wish she had had more prominence into the story because I found her reflections and logical chain of thoughts more than brilliant.
I found it ironic that Casaubon was focusing on occult investigations while ignoring the legitimate miracles of love and new birth when Lia discloses him she is pregnant. It is Casaubon's desire (obsession?) for knowledge, or rather his intemperate lust for knowledge that will lead him into the arms of The Plan and to lose control. This lust is played out allegorically in the form of his desire for Lorenza. Sophia, being the Greek name for wisdom or certain types of knowledge, is the name that Agliè gives Lorenza. I thought Casaubon's lust for Lorenza in Piedmont mirrored his lust after Sophia or wisdom. In both cases his wife Lia was the counterpoint to his lust for wisdom and Lorenza. A pity he didn't listen to her.
But as Jan-Maat pointed out, mythology and esoterism might be empty vessels, the same as Lorenza, who turns out to be a shallow puppet dancing at the rhythm of delusion.

I found Lia's interpretation of Cassaubon's research in finding numerical correlations in chapter 63 simply hilarious and befitting.

I am enclosing the passage in a spoiler because it's overlong.

(view spoiler)[ "We move on to the magic numbers your authors are so fond of. You are one and not two, your cock is one and my cunt is one, and we have one nose and one heart; so you see how many important things come in ones. But we have two eyes, two ears, two nostrils, my breasts, your balls, legs, arms, buttocks. Three is the most magical of all, because our body doesn’t know that number; we don’t have three of anything, and it should be a very mysterious number that we attribute to God, wherever we live. But if you think about it, I have one cunt and you have one cock, shut up and don’t joke and if we put these two together, a new thing is made, and we become three. So you don’t have to be a university professor or use a computer to discover that all cultures on earth have ternary structures, trinities.
But two arms and two legs make four, and four is a beautiful -number when you consider that animals have four legs and little children go on all fours, as the Sphinx knew. We hardly have to discuss five, the fingers of the hand and then with both hands you get that other sacred number, ten. There have to be ten commandments because, if there were twelve, when the priest counts one, two, three, holding up his fingers, and comes to the last two, he’d have to borrow a hand from the sacristan.
Now, if you take the body and count all the things that grow from the trunk, arms, legs, head, and cock, you get six; but for women it’s seven. For this reason, it seems to me that among your authors six is never taken seriously, except as the double of three, because it’s familiar to the males, who don’t have any seven. So when the males rule, they prefer to see seven as the mysterious sacred number, forgetting about women’s tits, but what the hell.
Eight ... eight ... give me a minute.... If arms and legs don’t count as one apiece but two, because of elbows and knees, you have eight parts that move; add the torso and you have nine, add the head and you have ten. Just sticking with the body, you can get all the numbers you want. The orifices, for example."
"The orifices?"
"Yes. How many holes does the body have?"
I counted. "Eyes, nostrils, ears, mouth, ass: eight."
"You see? Another reason eight is a beautiful number. (hide spoiler)]

In fact, I could have quoted the whole chapter as I thought it to be remarkable as I believe Eco was giving away his own views on "The Plan" in this chapter, I found it to be specially explicit when Casaubon reflects in retrospect at the end of this section and thinks how he allowed himself to be seduced by the thought of Sophia (Lorenza) instead of listening to reasonable and nurturing Lia, the matriarchal authority and the image of female fecundity and bearer of natural wisdom. Such great dichotomy of the female figure!

Thank you Trav, much appreciated! :)

"See here: if you look at the world in a certain way, everything is connected to everything else."
Significative reflection when Agliè and Diotallevi are discussing the importance of numerical correspondences as symbols to provide meaning because Eco seems to be hinting the human need to search for meaning and some sort of certainty in their lives in one way or another: either through occultism, analysis of symbols or Cabbalist wisdom...what matters is to find meaning in the end, even if it doesn't exist, and I wonder...at what cost?
(view spoiler)[ I am also pointing out a future passage in chapter 63 where Lia (what a great character) mocks the supposedly "revealing" conclusions Cassaubon and his collaborators have achieved, which brings me to compare Lia with Lorenza. Just placing a mental note not to forget to mention the cited passage which I found brilliant (hide spoiler)]

Have also been wanting to read Sylvia Plath's The Bell Jar and John Williams'Augustus.
But I am in the same position as you Trav.
I am planning to read "The Brothers Karamazov" in January and that might take the rest of the month and maybe part of February as well...

I am in for Harumi Murakami Trav, I've got his "Dance Dance Dance" waiting to be read on my shelves.

Traveller wrote: "Dolors wrote: "What most struck me about this part is this need to find meaning in symbols and signs, to find meaning everywhere. Even words are presented as nothing more than physical marks on a p..."

I have been re-reading Pessoa's The Book of Disquiet these past days and I was astonished to detect the use of semiotics and aphorisms in his novel. I did a bit of research and it seems Pessoa was very interested in secret societies and occultism and that he had an esoteric approach to existence with was mostly unknown at the time. The influences of symbols and signs in language and literature amazes me because I had never given it a second thought - not until reading FP- and it seems it has had a significant impact in the history of thought.

http://www.nthposition.com/themagical...

http://faena.com/en/content/fernando-...

Traveller wrote: "Hmm, so exactly what happened in Brazil with Casaubon after Amparo's er... mystic experience? I had initially thought he'd actually liked that she was, you know, Brazilian deep down in her spirit,..."

My intake of it was that Amparo, having considered herself an European at heart (a materialistic Marxist) and being an sceptic of her Brazilian heritage, she felt ashamed after becoming possessed in the ceremony and that's why she left Casaubon. I guess she had to struggle against an inner conflict: imposed reason or natural mysticism.
I could understand her conflicted reaction but I didn't understand Casaubon's lack of interest in keeping her. I guess he had other things, like the meaning of existence, in his mind! ;P

Traveller wrote: "I've also thought that its probably because Brazil has such a strong occult leaning. But besides that, Eco is bringing in some politics too. He is for example, bringing in the whole question of wh..."

Trav, nice post and I think that very fitting reference to why Eco might have wanted to include Brazil and that mystifying experience as the trigger of an "obsession" to find meaning and analogies everywhere. So vast was Casaubon's fixation that he even found parallels between Brazilian voodoo beliefs and European tradition (with the help of suspicious Agliè).

What most struck me about this part is this need to find meaning in symbols and signs, to find meaning everywhere. Even words are presented as nothing more than physical marks on a piece of paper. The importance of signs is their ability to convey meaning and meaning is ultimately located in the mind of the individual rather than in the signs themselves. So might there be meaning after all or just the need to find meaning?

Agliè makes his appearance in this section and I couldn't help but wonder where all his knowledge on occultism came from. He seems the sort of beguiling type with all his sweet talk and good manners that so much charms Amparo and then that reference linking him to the Compte de Saint-Germain...mmmm, suspicious.

Traveller wrote: "Oh! I still wanted to ask you what you people thought of Eco's commentary on Brazil... I didn't know Brazil had so much of an "African" focus.

Also, did you believe Belbo that he only found the ..."

My intake of the "Brazil episode" is that mysterious Agliè is trying to introduce Casaubon to the supposedly occult forces that run deep in the roots of special aborigines or ancient tribes as a counterpoint to his logical and rationalistic approach to understanding history and truth. Is mysticism a valid answer? That's what I thought Eco was trying to present through Agliè's vouch for spiritualism.
Changing subjects. I find myself sort of liking Amparo, who seems a dedicated Marxist with a firmly held materialistic view of the world. There's a lot to be said about the female characters in this novel. I am taking a mental note not to forget when the time comes! :)

I was also dumbstruck by the Ardenti's cryptic reference to this mysterious scholar called "Rakosky", whom both Belbo and Casaubon don't know much about as it can be extracted from the following affirmation at the beginning of chapter 21.

"Did you notice how he quoted that Rakosky, or Rostropovich, as if the man were Kant?"

It seems both Belbo and Casaubon have forgotten all about the scientific method and their resolution to stick to certainty and logic after listening to Ardenti's conspiracy theory, which seems to be based on speculation and fashion rather than real facts. I guess Ardenti's theories are those first "drops of poison" Casaubon refers to at the beginning of chapter 21.

I've been awol from the discussion thread but that doesn't mean I have stopped reading, and oh dear, even though I find myself in terra icognita most of the time I am finding the novel a gripping display of wit, erudition and intelligent humor.
When I read Ardenti's fanciful but familiar account I thought Eco was parodying the Holy Blood - Holy Grail" same old story. The fact that Ardenti is presented as some sort of ex-Nazi type who had no scruples about stealing that parchment to an innocent woman also can be seen as a forewarning as to the veracity of his suspicious account.

Thanks for those pictures Ruth, Eco knows how choose his references well. Heh, Trav. The gel sequence reminded me of "There's something about Mary", I know, not very erudite, but Eco encourages contrasts so there I leave that for posterity.
And Trav, regarding this joining ritual you mention. When Belbo is to receive the hundred kicks in his behind to be admitted into the gang, he ironically thinks the purpose of the trashing might be to reawaken his "serpent Kundalini".
I was unfamiliar with this yogic term and after searching for its meaning I was surprised to find it described as a "form of feminine corporeal energy" which seems to purify the soul to reach complete and pure spiritual enlightenment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kundalini

I find it funny that for the moment, femininity seems to be linked to the spiritual, almost mystical world, first Sophia/Lorenza and now this little reference here.

I found it pretty funny that the beginning of chapter 13 starts with the description of a fascist physiognomy and that throughout the discussion in the pub Diotallevi, with all his passion for cabala, he insists on his Jewish heritage,which is apparently totally unfounded. Also the passage where Casaubon addresses the templars as not racists because "they fought the Moslems in a spirit of chivalry and with mutual respect" only to have Belbo's assessment a few pages later that the "Moor is cruel." It seems to me as if Eco is blatantly using his cleverness and erudition to play Tom and Jerry and "disinform" rather than "enlighten" the reader.

I've been out for the weekend and I see I missed the most interesting discussion while I was away.
Reading Michele's particularly engaging posts about the influence of computers in the rational aspect of human beings, I can relate some of her ideas to the impression I had while reading chapter 3, in which Casaubon goes through Belbo's "files" (which btw were protected by the most spectacular yet witless password of all history. Eco is a walking contradiction).
Casaubon's account of how Belbo let his mind wander in front of a blank page, associating ideas and writing texts that were never to see the light, texts that, therefore, were freer than if they had been intended for publication got me thinking. I see Belbo's apparent choice to resign writing in favor of reading as a result of a pragmatic and logical approach. His resolve of being an intelligent spectator when he acquiesces he can't become the "main character" is a perfect example of a cost opportunity trade-off analysis, hence of rationality.
It also reminds me of Bolaño and his statement than reading is always more important than writing.

Exactly Ruth, Sophia might be a reference to the gnostic incarnation of Demiurge's mother and source of wisdom. I can't wait to meet this Lorenza Pellegrini to actually see whether she is really a muse, a kind of Sophia-widsom like archetype or if Eco is playing one of his games and the character turns out to be something completely opposite to what they apparently seem. In a sense, this female character might also be another conduit to present once more Eco's constant juxtaposition between wisdom and science.

Traveller wrote: "Dolors wrote: "The inscription behind Lorenza's photograph Casaubon finds in Belbo's apartment makes me wonder about the portrait of the feminine archetype Eco might be trying to paint:

"For I am ..."

No, I haven't Trav, but it seems like a must-read to better understand the origins of Christianity.
"Sophia" as wisdom, of course.
I wonder whether Eco is putting the female figure to the test as he seems to be doing with traditionally arcane wisdom and his particular jocose tone.