21st Century Literature discussion

For discussion of the complete book as a whole.

This is a novel about the history of ideas and, in particular, about the association of ideas. Cipriano Algor ruminates that "they draw each other out, one after the other, the skill lies in not losing the thread". And it is to Saramago's credit that the thread is never lost.

The first reference to a cave is when Cipriano Algor suggests that a solution to the problem of his unwanted crockery would be to dump it in a cave. This is in fact what he does do, although he doesn't so much dump it as put it away carefully in a space that is not unlike a cave.

Later in the book there is another reference to a cave when Cipriano Algor dreams that he is inside a new kiln and observes both Marçel’s and the head of the buying department’s shadows on the back wall. This section of the book foreshadows the cave that Cipriano and Marçel will observe at the Centre.

The importance of the bench is apparent (within and without the kiln), but what of the tree?

And what is meant when the assistant head of department tells Cipriano Algor, “Yes the secret of the bee doesn't exist, but we know what it is"?

Finally, why did Cipriano Algor and the rest of the family place all the figurines outside the door of the house before setting off towards their future?

All I can say is, wow. I am glad that I stuck with it, despite my difficulties with the flow and the run-ons. I am not really sure how I feel about this book...there were so many emotions. Throughout the book, I felt like there was something big and terrible lurking around the corner. I was filled with a deep sense of foreboding towards the end of the book, at the point where the Center was not going to accept the figurines, and the family made the decision to move. It felt as if the life was being sucked from them, and everything culminating with the discovery of Plato's Cave beneath the Center. Looking back through the story now, you can see all of the pieces of the puzzle being presented throughout, especially the references to the cave, the bench, and Cipriano's dream of shadows on the kiln wall. I am very happy with the way this story ended. I was very glad that they all realized what was happening, and decided to set out to create a life for their family, for living with the shadows of reality is not really living at all.

Just finished the book, and it was rather remarkable. I loved the language throughout, and the way it supported the internal logic of the narrator and the characters.

A couple questions I have for the group: what did everyone think about the potential political implications of the book? There seemed to be a definite idealization of the rural/agrarian lifestyle and a marked cynicism towards capitalism and commercialism that made me think Saramago may have some socialist/communist leanings. Maybe it just makes for a nice allegory with city vs. country, but I wonder if anybody else read the novel on some level as a polemic.

The ending was a great culmination of the themes contained throughout the novel, and it was all expertly hinted at, but I kind of felt a little cheated. I read the novel as a fable of sorts, but it also had such a flavor of realism that I felt the ending was a bit too simplistic to be believable. It seemed to me that the author was making the argument that to leave the city and pursue love, work, and family was akin to leaving Plato's cave and achieving the Platonic ideal of a life. Did anybody else read the ending this way? When we leave the cave, what really waits for us on the other side? Is it fair to say that rejecting commercialism and moving to the country represents self-actualization?

Excellent book-there were times that I just re-read a particular passage to marvel at the lyricism of the language. I'm definitely going to have to check out more work by this author.

Yes, Glenn, I agree, I was slightly disappointed by the ending: it did seem rather simplistic when considering all that had gone before. However, I like your take on the ending; it wasn't quite what I had in mind when I'd finished the book, but what you say makes perfect sense. Leaving the cave does suggest a journey to the source of the light (and thereby to self- actualisation).

Saramago was indeed a proponent of anarcho-communism, and a member of the Communist Party of Portugal.

I read the story as a scathing indictment of mindless technological advancement, which Saramago suggests slowly destroys a person's sense of individuality and robs them of the reward of a good day's work, with the Center representing the worst in consumer appetites, distilling even rain and snow into a carefully orchestrated computer-generated show.

For me, any idealisation centres on the importance of reverence for the simple act of creating a thing of beauty, which is what a craftsman is bound to do. Whether or not the act of creation needs to take place in a rural/agrarian setting is a moot point, but in this novel it must!

I feel the same. I am definitely going to read more work by this author.

I'm glad you stuck with it Danielle! Quite right: living in your own shadow is a poor substitute for life.

What's the significance of the dog, and the tree?

I'm also curious to know what the burned-out vehicles represent!

“A tree weeps when cut down, a dog howls when beaten, but a man matures when offended. ” ~ Saramago

I wonder if he included the tree and dog as barometers. I remember as Marcal softened it was reflected most in how the dog reacted to him.

I also think Saramago was saying something about the seemingly worthlessness of the aged. Cirpriano was becoming obsolete.

Don't know about the vehicles, except that we tend to throw away things we no longer value - vehicles included.

I see the tree as a silent witness and the dog representing the value of unconditional love. As you say, the dog has a profound impact on Marcal.

We do indeed throw away things we no longer value, which is also a comment on the Centre's attitude to all things obsolete – including the elderly.

One of the things that struck me as curious was Saramago's take on individuality and creativity. I'm not sure what the anarcho-communism is; does it allow for these qualities? As I understand it, regular communism doesn't.

I was curious about the individuality question too. Coming from an American perspective, I'm used to hearing how most forms of government steal individuality and creativity from a person, but Saramago's point seems to be that unchecked commerce is much more effective at homogenizing a population and killing the unique properties of each person.

My guess is that Saramago believed in the ideal form of communism - that is, the final stage of history envisioned by Karl Marx where no one person is below any other and therefore each person is free to create and provide themselves in an authentic way. Read this way, Cipriano's move back to the village is a rejection of capitalism and an affirmation of control over his work and life. To an artist like Saramago, having control over one's own work will necessarily lead to creativity and individuality.

In practice, I'm aware of more evidence that communism stifles creativity (especially if it runs counter to the government's interests). But in my opinion, The Cave is not so much a statement in support of communism as a statement against unchecked capitalism, greed, and dehumanization.

Glenn wrote: "The Cave is not so much a statement in support of communism as a statement against unchecked capitalism, greed, and dehumanization."

Thank you, that sums it up beautifully.

Glenn and sohpia,
I'd like to agree that saramago had built up so much apprehension that after moving into the forsaken center, there was not a tidy enough closure. Cipriano and his daughter's family abandon what's been provided for them and go traveling in search of a life outside of the shadows (the shadow of a family tradition, the shadow of capitalism overall). Yet the assumption that no one is tied down to the money in their pocket is absurd. It's not that easy in this day and age to live like our pioneers. We are crippled by the system and I wish saramago had spent more time shedding light on the beautiful parts in life like the happiness in family night games and planting a garden, just enjoying life flourish by your own hand. Not watching life fill up and go out of style by the weight of your wallet.
The story is essentially about enlightenment but then it just ends there with the glimmer of the fear and apprehension as they leap into the unknown world searching for fulfillment. "we don't know where we're going but we'll get there." is slightly inspirational but also too mysterious.
Glenn mentioned the cynicism towards capitalism but I really think it's an attack at the consumers not the system itself. Cipriano explores what the system offers bc of his huge discount but he's splurging on things that people normally hate. For example the rain is a hassle no one enjoys, yet so many are laughing and frolicking in the artificial setting. One girl comments she was hooked after the first visit, very much like propaganda on say QVC. And even at a wireless store where consumers clamber to get the latest model.
Saramago pounded a powerful message into the last 50 pages (which is why the book was worth sticking with the whole way through) but I was expecting more inspiration. I went an entire year buying only necessities and went out of style in all my clothes and felt so free. I was unaffected by commercials and bargain sales. I didn't even go black Friday shopping. Recently, I've gotten some things that needed to be replaced, a torn jacket, boots with holes in the heels, and I keep reaching for magazines searching for sales and wishing I could have things I don't need. It's so depreciating. You feel less valuable without those things when someone else catches attention with the dress you were going to buy but didn't need.
While the marketing is a wretched tool it's also necessary and saramago did a great job of opening eyes and ears to what's important or necessary. There's no need to accessorize a soul, it speaks for itself.

There is indeed no need to accessorise a soul! I live a simple life - because I have no choice – and it's good.

I was left wondering how the family would survive after the book ended. It does have a 'and they all lived happily ever after' feel to it. We need the structures of capitalism to survive and I suspect they will, too. Saramago tells us nothing about the country beyond the pottery and none of them reflect on what they might find there.

Saramago doesn't explore the benefits of living like this (with the bare necessities), because I think the object of this book is to escape first, ask questions later…

Sophia,
Many use art as an escape, while cipriano was just carrying on a family tradition, I feel like saramago amplified the movement of lost artistry.
Rapper wale said in his song bittersweet, "uh the bittersweetness of this artform (people) will try to tweak it until the art's gone, understand every imperfection, I just take it in within my essence..." meaning the women hating and violent lyrics of some rappers still manage to make millions, and even with painters, and sculptures still working there is a way over due recognition that the ancient Greeks have received.
Art electives are diminishing and profitibilityis falling with it. Art is now a luxury that makes profit based on marketability not necessarily quality. Consider the documentary exit through the gift shop in witch the camera man trashed the very graffiti artists he idolizes. He made millions off simple graffiti techniques, making a statement that said "anyone with some glue can do this" but for world renowned artists like the mysterious Australian arist that everyone sees but no one knows, he slapped artists in the face.

I really like Glenn's take on the statement Saramago is trying to make. Thanks for sharing.

As for the after-book, I envisioned Cipriano and his family living with the widow (or she with them) and using her income to establish themselves as independent potters. I believe Cipriano mentions in the very beginning that there still might be a market for his pottery outside of the Center, but their bureaucracy prevented them from reaching his target audience.

Yes, you're right. I'd missed that.