Ĺ·±¦ÓéŔÖ

I’ve debated whether it would be best to do a separate thread for each story or one thread with both stories. Because we may have things to say that relate to both stories, I’ve opted for one thread, at least to start with.

Tlon, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius

Summary: A friend of the narrator introduces him to a mysterious four page article about the unknown country of Uqbar, whose literature �never refers to reality, but to two imaginary realms, Mel’Khnas and Tlon.� Later, the narrator finds a package sent to a deceased acquaintance. The package contains Volume XI, HLAER to JANGR, of �A First Encyclopedia of Tlon� which includes information on the languages, metaphysics, and literature of Tlon. In a postscript, the narrator explains that a �secret benevolent society� set out in the seventeenth century to invent a country, but later expanded their mission to invent a planet. The narrator gives several instances of the world of Tlon intruding physically into the real world, and when a copy of the entire �First Encyclopedia of Tlon� is found in 1944, the world of Tlon begins to replace reality. The narrator opines that the process will continue, and in a hundred years �the world will be Tlon.�

This story is richly detailed � some of the details are true, some are invented, and some are contradictory. The languages, metaphysics, and literature of Tlon are described with great ingenuity. There is so much here we can discuss, it’s hard to know where to start, but here are some possibilities:

Images of mirrors repeat through the story. What is their significance?

Is the narrator reliable? Are the contradictions in his account meaningful or important?

Do you agree with the conclusion that the world of Tlon would replace the real world because humans would be more fascinated by a world created by humans than by reality?

The Approach to Al-Mu’tasim

The narrator reviews a novel titled �The Approach to Al-Mu’tasim� by Mir Bahadur Ali, a Bombay attorney. The novel is described generally as a cross between an Islamic allegorical poem and a detective story. He discusses the publishing history, recounts the plot, and shares other criticisms and comments.

In the novel, a young law student who has renounced his Islamic faith becomes involved in a street riot between Muslims and Hindus in Bombay. He “kills (or thinks he has killed) a Hindu� and flees. He climbs a tower in a a garden and encounters a thief. The tower is one where those of the Parsee faith expose their dead to the elements, and the thief reveals that he steals gold teeth from the corpses. After some other comments from the thief, the tired student sleeps and then finds the thief gone with some of his money and cigarettes. Because he remembers the thief reviled a woman, �the law student reasons the wrath and hatred of a man so thoroughly despicable is the equivalent of a hymn of praise,� and decides to seek her.

In the following chapters, the student �falls among people of the lowest, vilest sort and accommodates himself to them, in a kind of contest of inequity.� But the law student sees “a moment of tenderness, of exaltation, of silence� in one of the vile men and wonders where the moment came from. He wonders if it was reflected from another person and �comes to a mysterious conclusion: Somewhere in the world there is a man from whom this clarity, this brightness, emanates…�. The law student decides to find that man and goes to seek him. The novel ends when he steps into the room that Al-Mu’tasim bids him enter. The narrator criticizes the novel for sinking into an allegory where �Al-Mu’tasim is an emblem of God, and the detailed itineraries of the hero are somehow the progress of the soul in its ascent to mystical plenitude.� He ends by identifying the novel’s debt to other literary sources.

This story is also richly detailed, and some details are true, some are invented, and some contradict each other. There are other similarities between the two stories for this week, including invented books that play an important role in the stories. Here are a couple questions that I’m puzzling over. What questions do you have?

Why would the author tell this story in the format of a book review?

Would you want to read the book based on the review?

Borges never wrote a novel, but in The Approach to Al-Mu’tasim, Borges very cleverly wrote a novel as a story by writing a review of it. Saves a lot of the trouble of writing a novel.

Susanna wrote: "Reading Borges is like having a conversation about the classics. Did anyone else notice the mention of Spinoza? -

"I have said that the people of that planet conceive the universe as a series of m..."

For some reason that name popped out when I read it! Though I don't quite see how Spinoza fits into the radical idealism of Tlon. I think it's common sense that time is an aspect of space/extension, otherwise motion and physical causation would not be possible. We had a brief discussion about Spinoza's thoughts on time, without any real conclusion, but I'm pretty sure he would take a common sense approach to this. The Tlonists have a more amusing problem -- they deny the persistence of material things in time. Ideas persist, so a material thing still corresponds to the idea of what it is, say a coin, but it is impossible for an observer to say that one coin is the same coin from one moment to the next. Radical idealism leads to radical skepticism, a denial of the physical world basically, which is why the doctrine of materialism is considered the greatest scandal. The Tlonists take Descartes' evil demon seriously!

Susan wrote: "Tlon, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius

Is the narrator reliable? Are the contradictions in his account meaningful or important?."

The story starts with a conversation between the narrator and Bioy Casares about a scheme for writing a novel in the first person that omits or corrupts what happens and runs into many contradictions. That seems to sum up this story itself, except that it isn't a novel of course. The novel was to have had a hidden meaning, one that only a handful of readers would be able to decipher, which revealed a "horrible or banal reality." Does this story do that? Is the fictional world of Tlon this horrible reality?

Susanna wrote: "Reading Borges is like having a conversation about the classics. Did anyone else notice the mention of Spinoza?."

Good way of putting it: �Reading Borges is like having a conversation about the classics.�. I lost track of all the authors and philosophers he mentioned in these two stories, including Spinoza, Hume, Berkeley, John H Watson aka Arthur Conan Doyle, Rudyard Kipling, Dorothy Sayers, G. K. Chesterton, Quevedo, Sir Thomas Browne, and Farid Al-din Abi Hamid Muhammad Ben Ibrahim, not to mention the references to his friends who were authors like Adolfo Bioy Casares.

Donnally wrote: "Borges never wrote a novel, but in The Approach to Al-Mu’tasim, Borges very cleverly wrote a novel as a story by writing a review of it. Saves a lot of the trouble of writing a novel."

Good point. Borges even points out in the Foreword �It is a laborious madness, and an impoverishing one, the madness of composing vast books� The better way to go about it is to pretend that those books already exist, and offer a summary, a commentary on them…�. And not only did he save himself the trouble of writing a long novel, he saved us the trouble of reading it ;)

Thomas wrote: "Susanna wrote: "Reading Borges is like having a conversation about the classics. Did anyone else notice the mention of Spinoza?� For some reason that name popped out when I read it! Though I don't quite see how Spinoza fits into the radical idealism of Tlon. ..."

It almost sounds as though all the philosophies we know plus others exist on Tlon. “One might well deduce, therefore, that on Tlon, there are no sciences—or even any “systems of thought�. The paradoxical truth is that systems of thought do exist, almost countless numbers of them. Philosophies are much like the nouns of the northern hemisphere;. the fact that every philosophy is by definition a dialectical game, a Philosophie des Als Ob, has allowed them to proliferate. There are systems upon systems that are incredible, but possessed of a pleasing architecture or certain agreeable sensationalism. The metaphysician of Tlon seek not truth, or even plausibility—they seek to amaze, astound. In their view, metaphysics is a branch of the literature of fantasy.� [Tlon, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius] I wonder if Borges himself agrees with that last sentence. He certainly takes a playful approach to the subject in this story.

Thomas wrote: " .. The Tlonists have a more amusing problem -- they deny the persistence of material things in time. Ideas persist, so a material thing still corresponds to the idea of what it is, say a coin, but it is impossible for an observer to say that one coin is the same coin from one moment to the next. Radical idealism leads to radical skepticism, a denial of the physical world basically, which is why the doctrine of materialism is considered the greatest scandal. The Tlonists take Descartes' evil demon seriously!."

Thanks for explaining this, Thomas. It went right over my head in context, but my impression is that Borges knows exactly what he is doing and is enjoying his own humor ;) even if some readers miss it

Thomas wrote: "The story starts with a conversation between the narrator and Bioy Casares about a scheme for writing a novel in the first person that omits or corrupts what happens and runs into many contradictions. That seems to sum up this story itself, except that it isn't a novel of course. The novel was to have had a hidden meaning, one that only a handful of readers would be able to decipher, which revealed a "horrible or banal reality." Does this story do that? Is the fictional world of Tlon this horrible reality?.."

I wonder. If Tlon, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius ended with Part 2, then I would have no idea what the “horrible or banal reality� might be, except that it might relate to Tlon or Uqbar or Orbis Tertuis. But the Postscript spells out that Tlon is intruding into the real world as well as the fictitious origin of Uqbar, Tlon, and Orbis Tertius (which were hinted at in Part 2). Maybe the horrible reality is that works of fiction can become true with all their �transparent tigers and towers of blood�? There’s a classic science fiction story about a place where dreams come true, which sounds good to the narrator until someone points out that includes nightmares�.

I read the "intrusion" of Tlon differently, though I know little to nothing about Borges himself as a writer, so possibly this is off base with what one might expect of him. But the mention of Jesus Christ earlier in the story made me pay attention to possible religious undertones later. Of Tlon, the narrator says, "Captivated by its discipline, humanity forgets and goes on forgetting that it is the discipline of chess players, not of angels"--another religious reference. All this made me wonder whether I was reading a skeptic of organized religion:

"Now, the conjectural 'primitive language' of Tlon has found its way into the schools. Now, the teaching of its harmonious history, full of stirring episodes, has obliterated the history which dominated my childhood. Now, in all memories, a fictitious past occupies the place of any other..."

I'm not certain this reading holds up through every line, but it's one thing I noticed.

Honestly, I feel like you could spend an entire college semester on this one story!

Susan wrote: "There’s a classic science fiction story about a place where dreams come true, which sounds good to the narrator until someone points out that includes nightmares�.."

I thought maybe that is the horrible reality itself -- that the only reality for Tlon is in their ideas. They are unmoored from the physical world they inhabit. They have no home in the world. But looking over the story again for the umpteenth time I remembered that Tlon is an imaginary world created by the people of Uqbar; Tlon is a fantasy, not real at all. And the philosophy expressed in this fantasy is the same as that of the heresiarch of Uqbar -- that "the visible universe was an illusion, or more precisely, a sophism". But this is coming from an heresiarch. Since this philosophy is heresy, the people of Uqbar disbelieve it, and probably censure it as an unhealthy fiction. (That might explain the missing pages from the Encyclopedia.)

Kathy wrote: "Of Tlon, the narrator says, "Captivated by its discipline, humanity forgets and goes on forgetting that it is the discipline of chess players, not of angels"--another religious reference. All this made me wonder whether I was reading a skeptic of organized religion"

His criticism might be directed at any fiction that is mistaken for reality. I think that would include philosophy, history, and political theory as well as religion.

Ten years ago, any symmetrical system whatsoever which gave the appearance of order -- dialectical materialism, anti-Semitism, Nazism -- was enough to fascinate men. Why not fall under the influence of Tlon and submit to the minute and vast evidence of an ordered planet?

The millionaire ascetic George Buckley, nihilist and apologist for slavery, "wished to demonstrate to the non-existent God that mortal men were capable of conceiving a world," and commissions the Encyclopedia of Tlon to this end.

The problem is that what this world offers is chaos, not order. Societies require shared delusions -- the value of the slips of green paper we carry in our wallets, for example -- conventions that have no bearing on the actual value of paper. We order our worlds with commonly accepted fictions -- scriptures, constitutions, social conventions. But the fictions of Tlon are unstable to say the least. They threaten language itself, and even the past will be replaced by another version of the past.

I'm not sure what to conclude from all this. The narrator decides to ignore it all and continue his translation project. Maybe this is his way of imposing order on the world?

Thomas wrote: " Societies require shared delusions -- the value of the slips of green paper we carry in our wallets, for example -- conventions that have no bearing on the actual value of paper. We order our worlds with commonly accepted fictions -- scriptures, constitutions, social conventions"

I think the word 'delusions' is incorrect. Societies simply require that everyone play the game by the same set of rules. Those slips of green paper, as you point out, have no value. What has value is the things they are exchanged for, just like the colored slips of money used when playing the game of Monopoly.

Kathy wrote: "I read the "intrusion" of Tlon differently, though I know little to nothing about Borges himself as a writer, so possibly this is off base with what one might expect of him. But the mention of Jesu..."

I don’t know much about Borges either, Kathy; I’ve read a few short stories and some of his essays. I guess we’ll both know more by the time we finish this book ;).

I had a different take on the passage you cited from ”Tlon, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius� I read Borges as “pro� angel and “pro� messy reality and against the “discipline of chess players� and the “harmonious history� of Tlon. But maybe that’s my bias showing. In support of it though, Borges certainly is at pains to introduce contradictions and multiple takes in the story he tells.

“The Approach to Al-Mu’tasim� clearly has many references to religion, from the free-thinking protagonist to the fight between Moslems and Hindus over a Moslem religious ritual, the encounter with burial customs of the Parsees/Zoroastrians, and what seems like a search for the source of goodness in the world. I wondered what your take was on that story?

Thomas wrote: " But looking over the story again for the umpteenth time I remembered that Tlon is an imaginary world created by the people of Uqbar; Tlon is a fantasy, not real at all. And the philosophy expressed in this fantasy is the same as that of the heresiarch of Uqbar -- that "the visible universe was an illusion, or more precisely, a sophism". But this is coming from an heresiarch. Since this philosophy is heresy, the people of Uqbar disbelieve it, and probably censure it as an unhealthy fiction...."

Thanks for the reminder that �this [philosophy] is coming from a heresiarch,� and is heresy. Tlon does start to take on a certain reality despite its imaginary nature. Then, Uqbar itself is also imaginary. So is the secret society that invented them both. Borges� image of the mirror is starting to make sense to me, although maybe a labyrinth would be better ;)

Susan wrote: "Thomas wrote: " But looking over the story again for the umpteenth time I remembered that Tlon is an imaginary world created by the people of Uqbar; Tlon is a fantasy, not real at all. And the phil..."

Actually, let me correct that. In the story, Tlon and Uqbar are imaginary. The secret committee is real. But if Tlon is emerging into our world, then it is no longer imaginary?

Donnally wrote: "Borges never wrote a novel, but in The Approach to Al-Mu’tasim, Borges very cleverly wrote a novel as a story by writing a review of it. Saves a lot of the trouble of writing a novel."

Thou quoth well!

I'm wondering if I could/can learn from Borges. Such a mind, such a "creator," such a .... One tumbles down a "grown-ups" rabbit hole?

Susan wrote: "Borges knows exactly what he is doing and is enjoying his own humor ;) even if some readers miss it..."

Well, at least has the hutzpah to enjoy his own humor and that he can effectively yield his skills therewith, even in the esoteric environs he blindly, or not so blindly, walks. All is constructed, or obliterated?, by those soggy masses encased in bone? But, oh, I try too hard, without the finesse of our learned host as he tilted with hearty dictators -- yeh, Borges would have had a more apt descriptive word, possibly of Portuguese lineage straight-lined from the Inquisition.

Susan wrote: "“The Approach to Al-Mu’tasim� clearly has many references to religion... I wondered what your take was on that story?"

Like Donnally, I thought it was a clever way to "write" a novel Borges might have been toying with, without actually having to write it. The plot and notions are pretty well formed. I did note the religious references in this one as well, and the critique that the 1934 version "sinks into allegory" and "insinuates a unitary God who accommodates himself to human diversities," which the narrator finds "not very stimulating."

I think the most interesting part of these two stories for me was the word play in Tlon: the concept of a language with no nouns, or nouns as an accumulation of adjectives.

Borges's mind seems so full of ideas that he doesn't know what to do with them, so he tries them out in these world-building scenarios, when any one of them could be unspooled much farther itself, separate from the others. He creates a web (labyrinth, whatever) of so many different ideas that one doesn't know where to turn!

Susan wrote: "...Borges� image of the mirror is starting to make sense to me, although maybe a labyrinth would be better ;)"

This takes us to the most frightening of them all: the labyrinth of mirrors :)

Kathy wrote: "...He creates a web (labyrinth, whatever) of so many different ideas that one doesn't know where to turn!..."

He is not a guide? Or, other ways of positing my confusion -- is he "leading" the reader someplace? If so, where, why? Where does all of this fit with the concept of "modernism" in literature? Or is he attempting to articulate an arcane view of "reality" via fantasy, absurdity, or some still other techniques by which or for which words can be manipulated? Does Borges have "objectives" for his writing to "accomplish", other than to gain himself a Nobel prize, a "personal?" objective which he so (sadly?) skirted at least twice.

Monica wrote: "Susan wrote: "...Borges� image of the mirror is starting to make sense to me, although maybe a labyrinth would be better ;)"

This takes us to the most frightening of them all: the labyrinth of mirrors...""

Elsewhere on these Ĺ·±¦ÓéŔÖ pages today, from Virginia Wolfe: "People should not leave looking-glasses hanging in their rooms any more than they should leave open cheque books or letters confessing some hideous crime..."

So what is so "frightening" about mirrors -- the forced self-reflection, the infinity of images if a mirror against a mirror, ... More frightening than a non-navigable maze? The significance of the difference between a maze and a labyrinth?

Lily wrote: "...So what is so "frightening" about mirrors -- the forced self-reflection, the infinity of images if a mirror against a mirror, ... More frightening than a non-navigable maze? The significance of the difference between a maze and a labyrinth?"

Maybe mirrors are so frightening because the same idea of Tlon: they seem to be a window to a parallel world where things are similar but nothing guarantees that they are exactly the same. Or even that "our side" is the real one.

Obs.: I did not know that there was a difference between maze and labyrinth. In Portuguese, we have only one word to describe both of them.

Kathy wrote: ". I think the most interesting part of these two stories for me was the word play in Tlon: the concept of a language with no nouns, or nouns as an accumulation of adjectives� He creates a web (labyrinth, whatever) of so many different ideas that one doesn't know where to turn!."

I was fascinated by the Tlon language section, with the moon examples, including “Upward, behind the onstreaming it mooned.� And I agree Tlon, Uqbar, Orbis Tertius offers so many disparate ideas that it’s challenging to focus on any particular one. But if I had to pick, I’d pick the languages of the northern and southern hemispheres ;)

Monica wrote: "This takes us to the most frightening of them all: the labyrinth of mirrors :)�

Hahaha. For some reason, this made me think of the scene in the funhouse in the movie �The Lady of Shanghai� where “the labyrinth of mirrors� is terrifying:

Lily wrote: "He is not a guide? Or, other ways of positing my confusion -- is he "lea..."

Some good questions here. I’ve broken them out to make sure everything is addressed.

1) He [Borges] is not a guide? Or, other ways of positing my confusion -- is he "leading" the reader someplace? If so, where, why?
2) Where does all of this fit with the concept of "modernism" in literature?
3) Or is he attempting to articulate an arcane view of "reality" via fantasy, absurdity, or some still other techniques by which or for which words can be manipulated?
4) Does Borges have "objectives" for his writing to "accomplish", other than to gain himself a Nobel prize, a "personal?" objective which he so (sadly?) skirted at least twice. .

Some thoughts:

1) My sense is that Borges is very much creating a picture for the reader. The wealth of detail about the philosophies and languages of Tlon is one example. He also narrates a sequence of events: first the narrator encounters the mysterious article on Uqbar, then he finds a volume of the Tlon Encyclopedia, then he learns the revelations in the Postscript. Where is he taking us? Tlon seems like the answer to me for that particular story. Why? I’m not sure I know the answer, but I enjoyed the trip ;).
2) This question is outside the scope of what we do here as a group of people with various backgrounds and experiences focused on reading and discussing the text together. That’s not meant in any way as a criticism of the question, just a suggestion that a biography, professor of literature, literary history, etc. would be the place to find an answer about Borges and “modernism�.
3) I’m not sure I understand this question. Can you say more about it? I do think Borges is playing with ideas and images in ways I don’t understand yet.
4) This also seems a question for a biography or other source, since who but a biographer or friend knows whether he wrote for money, fame, and/or to express himself? I don’t see how to tell from the stories we’ve read.

When one "lives" among writers, as I more or less have for the past several years, I think one realizes a sort of a sprachge·fühl often exists between writer and text. I feel such is very present between Borges and his text. My comments are more comments than questions. If the words elicit reactions from others, so be it. If not, maybe I have explored a dead end and will perhaps consider another way into a text I consider as complex and overlaid with meaning and timing in history as any we have tackled.

Not totally unlike a scripture story one has heard expounded on from more directions one can count (as new pieces/perspectives are explored). Where is the meaning, except perhaps to challenge other meanings? What does one do living in a Trump world? In a Peron world? Is a skilled wordsmith navigating either such world able to bring pragmatic, albeit sometimes fantastical, insights to his reader?

@26 Monica wrote: "Obs.: I did not know that there was a difference between maze and labyrinth. In Portuguese, we have only one word to describe both of them.."

Monica -- when Merriam-Webster didn't give me much satisfaction as to differences in meaning, other than that implied by the use an author employed, Google gave me this:

"The maze represents a beautiful metaphor for the many twists and turns of our lives, and is a symbol of hope and opportunity. Unlike the labyrinth, which has only one entry and exit point, a maze has multiple potential starting paths and endpoints." (Peninsula Mental Health)

"What is a Labyrinth? A labyrinth is a meandering path, often unicursal, with a singular path leading to a center. Labyrinths are an ancient archetype dating back 4,000 years or more, used symbolically, as a walking meditation, choreographed dance, or site of rituals and ceremony, among other things." (The Labyrinth Society)

My search was "labyrinth story." When I started, my memory of the originating(?) Minotaur story was faded. The series of responses was a fun diversion (more a maze than a labyrinth?). Certainly another example of the religious/mythological themes/tones Borges seems to weave into his stories -- the number of which startled me on the browsing of the titles offered by Thrift Books (which as I think I stated elsewhere, I am not certain are all "real.")

Interesting definitions. I think of a maze as a puzzle--though the word "labyrinth" is almost always used to describe the puzzle Daedalus created to trap the minotaur. I think of a labyrinth, as this definition says, as being more of a meandering path that you walk, not because you're trying to decipher the way out but because you're meditating along the route. I know these terms will come up again, so it will be interesting to pay attention to possible distinctions--although we have to keep in mind that the hand of a translator is involved as well.