Breaking the fourth wall with Calvino

Hello everyone, 

This week I'm breaking character because what is this book. I remember being so sad when I was reading blog guidelines at the start of term and seeing that Tumblr got a specific restriction (which of course is probably for good reason, but still) BUT this was such an interesting read that it makes up for the loss, even if it was a bit slow at times (I learned early on that it got very purple). 

Admittedly it did trigger a certain feeling of rebellion (one that you'll be familiar with if you are also a fellow consumer of reader-insert content) that comes with works using the second perspective, like what do you mean I did this. No I didn't. 

The biggest 'no I didn't' for me was probably the assumption that 'Reader' is male, like okay. I think the very beginning was just vague enough that I was nodding along, like yeah I can get with this. I believe that this is happening. Okay, I went to a bookstore and bought this book despite all these other very aptly labeled books vying for my attention. 

But THEN Calvino, or 'I' goes like yeah. You meet this lady and you're obviously interested in her and all of a sudden the words feel like 'hey is it just me or is this a little bit male gaze coded'. If you're going to write a story where the reader is a character, and this mechanism is supposed to apply to EVERY reader, then I think it's fairly clear that the reader's identity should then be made ambiguous enough that anyone reading the book can go 'yeah omg I did do that' and not be caught off guard when we form a specific relationship--which leads me to another thing. Ludmilla is introduced as the 'Other Reader', which is confusing enough on its own, but it just feels like a sudden deviation, like no, I did not ask to be separated into Reader parts. 

Which is honestly even more odd to think about when you consider the fact that Reader decides to marry Ludmilla (or Other Reader). It really gets you thinking about what 'reader' even means in the context of this story. That might be a decent discussion question for this week--fitting, if not anything else. What do you think that the word / title 'reader' means in this story? How did you interpret it?

I think it works as a decent question considering the main themes of this story concern the relationship between you as a reader and the story / novel / book. Though I do also want to know what your 'no I didn't' moments were throughout this story. What were some things that you disagreed with in the novel? When were your 'no I didn't's?

Excited to see what we'll talk about in class. 

Your Other Local Woodland Witch,

June

  

Comments

  1. Jon Beasley-MurrayMarch 1, 2026 at 11:43 PM

    "Tumblr got a specific restriction."

    FYI this is because Tumblr doesn't play nice with the syndication system that relays your blog to the course website. :(

    ReplyDelete
  2. Daniel OrizagaMarch 1, 2026 at 11:47 PM

    "What do you think that the word / title 'reader' means in this story? How did you interpret it?" I must say I like this question... Is being a "reader" something you acquire? Because if so, I think you could also renounce it... and we have some examples of this in the novel. Having learned to read (something very difficult to resist in our social context), are we tainted by it, condemned to seek out stories with endings?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Xavier LowMarch 2, 2026 at 10:47 PM

    test

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Xavier LowMarch 2, 2026 at 10:54 PM

      Excellent question about what a "reader" is, which we take for granted as what we are reading the book. Despite being a "Reader", a lot of the book is spent doing things that are very much not "reading a book". From the elaborate foreplay in the opening chapter of everything you do before reading, to the elaborate foreplay and metaphor comparing reading to het sex. And all the globetrotting adventures just to get the pieces to be unable to read. And yeah, I get that, not specifically second-person perspective but those works with reader-inserts, and being a Reader isn't necessarily identifying with the characters in the book, either.

      As the book shows, you definitely don't need a completed book, or to finish reading a book, to be considered a Reader. Or it's the opposite, a book doesn't need to be complete and it can still be read. In the end, despite the unsatisfying conclusion to the book quest; Calvino's image of the Reader seems closer to a treatise on life and how to engage with the world; and the happiest ending of those template works on life (comedies) is celebration and het marriage. Maybe you don't even need a book to be a Reader? But you do need other Readers to have adventures with, or to discuss Books and Life with. Like these blogs.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Welcome to the Cottage

Hello all, and welcome to the cottage in the stacks (kindly play along, only if you please. You can make up your own woodland character in the comments, but of course you're not obligated to--do what makes you feel comfortable). I'm your local woodland witch, June (and for those who are wondering, I was born in August). This is my second year in the stacks, where I've been studying English literature. To clarify, I'm not the alchemist type of witch, so to speak--the arts are where I'm most comfortable, and it's been a sort of long-running joke of mine that I'd find myself living in the woods with no neighbours for miles around when it gets loud in the town. Indulging my inner escapist, if you will.  Lately however, I've been venturing out a bit more, and acquired a new number of books for my shelves--ones that I'll be reading over the course of the next few moons. I expect these may be somewhat of a challenge, albeit not unwelcome--being a recluse do...
Read more

Nadja in the very unorganized stacks

 Hello all, and welcome back to the cottage.  The stacks are toppling already--not the best of signs, but hopefully I should be able to get these tremors under control with a good spell of focus. I won't dally with describing the organizational troubles I underwent this week, this paper is short as it is and I'd like to get down some thoughts I had about Nadja,  though I've only just begun to delve into it.  So far, the way in which Breton writes is as if he is speaking to himself. I can't recall having knowingly read surrealist novels, though the style of the narration is very reminiscent of another book that I read a few moons ago called Open City, by Teju Cole. Cole's narrator also shows the audience a view of the world only through his own mind, which appears so removed from reality that there is always a question of reliability and truth lingering around his words. The way that Andre (the narrator) almost loses himself following a thread of his own thoughts on ...
Read more

Agostino in the villetta

 Hello all, and welcome back to the cottage.  I can't even begin to tell you the number of times I sighed during this week's read, and that's only for the beginning. But what an optimal time it was to read Agostino , considering that I recently learned a little more about Freud's ideas (what a silly, peculiar figure he was) and coincidentally was revisiting the rendition of Oedipus that I grew up on.  It's this thread that I'd like to pull on this week--especially because it is relevant to the question presented in lecture (what kind of effect does the omission of certain details create?). I learned the story of Oedipus from a particular series of books on Greek mythology (no, it was not Percy Jackson) when I was very young, and the choice words that the narration used throughout the series to signify the occurrence of sex were 'married' and 'fell in love' or 'made love', which certainly seem like curious and inaccurate substitutes now . ...
Read more