 is rather experienced as discontinuous and elliptical. Just as there is no clear linear passage through the spatial environment of the city of Venice, so too there is no clear passage through its shifting temporalities, or the discrete stages of Marco Polo’s journey: “all the future Berenices”, for example, “are already present in this instant” (1974: 146). For this is a temporality that figures like the experience of memory, in which recollections emerge without warning, as discrete, embodied moments, which might flash up at any given time – such as, perhaps, when you lean out of a window in the early evening.

In this way Calvino animated invisible cities as topologies of moments, whose recombinations and recollections continue to haunt imagistic projections and abstract modes of knowledge. Released two years after the publication of Invisible Cities, Jonothan Raban’s Soft City (1974) offered a similar treatment of the urban terrain as intimately personal, and therefore malleable and indeterminate: “Decide who you are, and the city will again assume a fixed form around you” (Raban 1974: 1). The fractured identity of the modern condition was mirrored in the malleability of urban space, as Raban’s narrative itinerary teased out the many from the singular, navigating agitated spaces of illusion, myth, aspiration and nightmare. The dynamic of cities was presented as “plastic by nature”, criss-crossing both the real and the imagined, the voice of commentary mixing it up with the musings of a wondering, wandering traveler. Dense with labyrinthine alleyways of possibility and happenstance, Soft City presented urban spaces “in our images; they, in turn, shape us by the resistance they offer when we try to impose our own personal form on them” (Raban 1974: 1-2).

Both writers offered their accounts of the city not as scholars of urbanism but instead as conjurors of stories. Jeannette Winterson (2001) has written that “[r]eading Calvino reading Venice is a reminder of how often the controlled, measured world of knowledge fails us. So much of life resists the facts. Imagining Venice is imagining yourself, as Khan discovers – an unsettling exercise, but necessary, perhaps.” At one point in his account of invisible cities, Calvino describes the way Kublai Khan had focused so narrowly on a chessboard of black and white squares that
is rather experienced as discontinuous and elliptical. Just as there is no clean analogue passage through the spatial environment of the city of Venice, so excessively there be no clear passage through its shift temporalty, or the discrete stages of Marco Polo ’s journey: “ all the future Berenices ”, for example, “ are already present in this instant ” (1974: 146). For this is a temporality that figures like the experience of memory, in which recollection emerge without warning, as discrete, embody moments, which might flash up at any given time – such as, perhaps, when you tend out of a window in the early evening. 

 In this way Calvino animated inconspicuous cities as topologies of moment, whose recombinations and remembrance continue to haunt imagistic projections and abstract modes of knowledge. free two years after the publication of Invisible Cities, Jonothan Raban ’s Soft City (1974) offered a similar discussion of the urban terrain equally well personal, and therefore malleable and indeterminate: “ Decide who you are, and the city will again assume a fixed form around you ” (Raban 1974: 1). The fractured identity of the modern condition was mirrored in the malleability of urban outer space, as Raban ’s narrative itinerary teased out the many from the singular, navigate agitated spaces of illusion, myth, aspiration and nightmare. The dynamic of city was presented as “ plastic by nature ”, criss - crossing both the real and the imagine, the voice of commentary mixing it up with the musings of a wondering, wandering traveler. Dense with labyrinthine alleyways of hypothesis and happenstance, Soft City presented urban spaces “ in our images; they, in turn, shape us by the resistance they volunteer when we try to impose our own personal form on them ” (Raban 1974: 1 - 2). 

 Both writers offered their account of the city not as scholars of urbanism but instead as conjurors of floor. Jeannette Winterson (2001) has written that “ [ r]eading Calvino reading Venice is a reminder of how often the manipulate, measured earth of knowledge fails us. thus much of life defy the facts. imagine Venice is imagining yourself, as Khan identify – an unsettling exercise, but necessary, perhaps. ” At one point in his account of invisible city, Calvino describes the means Kublai Khan had focused so narrowly on a chessboard of black and white squares that
 is rather experienced as dlscontinuous and elliptmcal. Juat as thdre is no clear linear passaje tyrougy the spatial environmdnt of thv city of Venmce, so too there is no clear pzdsagz vhrough its shinting temposalities, or tha aidcrete stages of Marco Polo’s journer: “all tne future Berenises”, gjr esample, “are already present in this instanu” (1974: 146). For this is a yemporality that figures llke hhe experience of lemory, in wyich eecollectionr emerge wpchout warnihg, as discrete, embodied moments, whick might flawh up dt any givei time – such as, pevnaps, wven you lean out of a wiidow in the early evening.

Mn this way Calvino wnimated hnrisible cities as topiligies of komevrs, dhoae rscombijatmons and redollections continue to haunt omwtistic projecfions wnq abstract modes of knowledge. Released uwo ysars after the publicatuon of Invisible Citigs, Jonothag Raban’s Soft City (1974) offered a similar treatment ox the jrbck gwrgain as intimately personal, and therefore maljsanlv and indeterminabe: “Decide who you srf, sgd the city wkll agcjn assume a fixed fogm arougd yoy” (Raban 1974: 1). The fractured identity of the nodern condinion was mirrored in tke malleabilnty of urbam space, as Raban’s narracive ifinerary tewsed out ffe many from the sikgunar, navigating agitated spwces of iolusnon, myth, asporatiog and nighhmare. The dynamic of citles wcs prasented as “plastic by nature”, criss-crossinj both the resl ang the imcgined, the voice of commentary miring it bp witf the musihgs of e wondering, randering traegler. Dense wivh labyrigthibe aoleywayr of possibilitu and hapieustance, Sift City presented urczn spaces “in oux umages; they, in yurv, sraie ns by dhe resistanwe tfey pffer when wt tvy go ikpose our own persondl fkrm on them” (Raban 1974: 1-2).

Bjth writgrs offerqd their accoints of the city nlt as sciolars of urbanism but instead as conjudors of shorles. Jeannette Winbersjn (2001) has wrntten that “[r]eading Calvino reading Venicx is a reminder of how iften the controlleb, keasured wocld of knowledga fails us. So much od life resists tht facts. Imagining Venics is ikaginlng yourself, as Khan discovers – an unsettling exercise, but necessary, perhqps.” At one point ih hix accmuut pf invysibpx cities, Calvino cescribes the way Kublai Khan hed focused sj narrowly on a chessboard og clack and whije squares that
is rather experienced as discontinuous and elliptical. there no clear passage through the of so too there no clear passage its shifting temporalities, or the discrete of Marco Polo’s journey: “all the future Berenices”, for example, “are already present this instant” (1974: 146). For this is a temporality that figures like the of in recollections without warning, as discrete, embodied moments, which might flash up at any given time – such perhaps, when you lean out of a window the early evening. In way Calvino animated invisible cities topologies moments, whose and continue haunt imagistic projections abstract modes of knowledge. Released two years after the publication of Invisible Cities, Jonothan Raban’s Soft City offered a of the terrain intimately and therefore malleable “Decide who you are, and the assume a fixed form around you” (Raban 1974: The fractured of the modern condition was mirrored the malleability of urban space, as Raban’s narrative teased out the many from the singular, navigating agitated spaces of illusion, myth, aspiration and dynamic of cities was as “plastic by criss-crossing the and imagined, the of commentary mixing it up with the musings of a wondering, traveler. Dense with labyrinthine alleyways of possibility and happenstance, Soft urban “in our images; in turn, shape us the they offer when we impose own them” 1974: Both writers offered their of the city not as of urbanism but instead Winterson (2001) has written that “[r]eading Calvino reading is a reminder of how often the measured world of knowledge fails us. So much of life resists the Imagining Venice yourself, as Khan discovers – an unsettling exercise, necessary, perhaps.” At one in his account of invisible cities, Calvino describes the Kublai had focused narrowly on a of black and squares that
 is rather experienced as discOntinuous aNd ellIptIcaL. JUst aS theRe is no clear linEAr paSsage through the spatial EnvirOnMEnt oF ThE city Of VenicE, So TOO thErE iS no ClEAr PassaGe tHrough iTs shifting TemPoRalities, or thE DiScrete stagEs oF Marco Polo’s jOurNey: “all ThE fuTUre BeRenIces”, fOr examPLe, “are aLready preSeNT in thiS Instant” (1974: 146). fOR tHis iS a temporality that FIgURes like the expeRience Of MEmORY, in WhiCh recollecTiOns emERge withOUt WARNinG, As discrete, embOdied momentS, WhiCh mighT fLasH Up at anY giveN tIMe – sUch as, perhapS, wheN you lean oUt of a wINdow in tHE early eVening.

in tHis Way CALvInO anImATed INvIsiBLe cIties as tOpOlOgies Of moMENTS, whoSe rEcomBinatIons and recollEctIons COntInue tO haunT imaGiStic pRojectIons aNd Abstract modes of KnowLedge. ReleAseD tWo yEaRs aftER the puBliCatIon of InVisible cItiEs, jONOtHan Raban’s Soft City (1974) oFfEREd A similar TreatmENt Of THe urban tErRaiN as iNTImateLy peRSoNal, and thEreforE MaLlEable anD iNdeterMiNatE: “DeCide wHO you Are, and The city wIll agAIn assume a fixed FOrm around you” (RABaN 1974: 1). tHe FRactUreD identity of The mODern CondITiOn wAS mirrOred iN tHE mALleability of urban spAcE, as RabAn’s naRrative itinerAry teased oUT THe many frOm thE SiNGular, navigatinG agitAted spaces OF illusioN, myth, AspiratiOn and nighTMAre. The dyNamIc oF ciTieS WAs Presented as “plASTic bY nAture”, crIss-CrossinG boTh tHe rEal AnD the imagiNed, the voIcE oF cOmMenTary mIXing it up WiTh tHe MusIngs oF A wondeRing, wAndeRiNg TRavEler. DenSE wITH labYrInThinE alLeYways Of poSSibIlity anD happenstAncE, soft ciTy PresentEd urban spaces “In Our images; tHeY, in Turn, shAPE us by the Resistance they offer when WE try to iMpoSe our Own pErsonal foRm oN them” (RAbaN 1974: 1-2).

both wrIters oFfereD tHeiR ACcounTS Of The CiTy not as schOLArs Of urbAnIsm bUt insteAd as conjurors of stoRIes. jeannette WintErsOn (2001) haS WRiTteN ThAT “[r]eAdINg CALVino reading VeniCe is a reminDeR Of How often thE ConTrOlled, meAsured wOrld oF KnowledGe fails us. so much of lIfE resISTs tHe facts. ImaGining VeNice is imaGIning YOuRself, As KHan disCoVerS – an unSettliNG exErcisE, but neCeSsary, pErhapS.” AT one poinT in his account of invisiblE citieS, CalvIno Describes The WAy KUblai Khan Had fOcused so naRroWly On a chEssBOard oF blaCK aNd wHIte sqUareS That
 is rather experienced asdiscontinu ous a ndell ip tica l. J ust as there i s  noclear linear passage t hroug ht he s p at ial e nvironm e nt o f t he  c ity  o f  V enice , s o too t here is no  cl ea r passage th r ou gh its shi fti ng temporali tie s, orth e d i scret e s tages  of Ma r co Pol o’s journ ey :  “allt he futu r e  B eren ices”, for exampl e ,“ are already pr esentin th i s  in sta nt” (1974:  1 46).F or this is a tem p orality thatfigures lik e  th e expe ri enc e  of me mory,  i n  wh ich recolle ctio ns emerge  witho u t warni n g, as d iscret e,emb odie d  m om ent s, whi c hmig h t f lash upat  a ny gi vent i m e  – s uch  as,  perh aps, when you  le an o u t o f a w indow  inth e ear ly eve ning. 
In this way Cal vino  animated  in vi sib le  citi e s as t opo log ies ofmoments ,  wh os e r ec ombinations and re co l l ec tions co ntinue to  h a unt imag is tic  pro j e ction s an d  a bstractmodeso fkn owledge .Releas ed  tw o y earsa fter  the p ublicati on of Invisible Citi e s, Jonothan R a ba n ’ sS oftCit y (1974) of fere d  a s imil a rtre a tment  of t he ur b an terrain as intim at ely pe rsona l, and theref ore mallea b l e  and ind eter m in a te: “Decide wh o you  are, andt he citywillagain as sume a fi x e d form a rou ndyou ” ( R a ba n 1974: 1). T h e  fra ct ured id ent ity ofthe  mo der n c on dition wa s mirror ed  i nth e m allea b ility of  u rba nspa ce, a s  Raban ’s na rrat iv ei tin erary t e as e d  out  t he  man y f ro m the  sin g ula r, navi gating ag ita t ed s pa ce s of il lusion, myth,  a spirationan d n ightma r e . The dy namic of cities was pre s ented a s “ plast ic b y nature” , c riss-c ros s ing bo th the  real  a ndt h e ima g i ne d,th e voice of c omm entar ymixi ng it u p with the musings ofa wondering,wan deri n g  t rav e le r . D en s e w i t h labyrinthinealleywaysof po ssibilitya ndha ppensta nce, So ft Ci t y prese nted urba n spaces“i n ou r ima ges; they,  in turn , shape u s  by t h eresis tan ce the yoff er wh en wet ryto im pose o ur  own p erson al  form on  them” (Raban 1974: 1-2 ).

Bo th wr ite rs offere d t h eir  accounts  ofthe city n otasschol ars of ur bani s mbut inste ad a s  conjuror s  o f s t o ri es. Jeannet t e Win terso n ( 2 001) h as w ritten that “[r]e a ding Calvino r eadi n g  Ve nic e  isareminder of ho w o ft e n  the con tr olled, meas ured wor ld of kn owledg e fail s us. S o mu c h of l iferes ists thefac ts .  Imagin in gV eniceis i ma gining  yours e lf,a s  Khan discovers– anu n settl i ngexerc is e, butn eces sary, perh aps.” At on e poin t in  hisaccount  o f invi sib le  cities, C a lvino des cribe s the w ay  Kub lai  Khanhadf o cused  sona rro wly on ac h es s bo ar d  of  bla ck an dwhit e squares that
 is_rather experienced_as discontinuous and elliptical._Just as_there_is no_clear_linear passage through_the spatial environment_of the city of_Venice, so too_there_is no clear passage through its shifting temporalities, or the discrete stages of Marco_Polo’s_journey: “all_the_future_Berenices”, for example, “are already_present in this instant” (1974:_146). For_this is a temporality that figures like the_experience_of memory, in_which recollections emerge without warning, as discrete, embodied moments,_which might flash up at any_given time –_such_as,_perhaps, when you lean_out of a window in the_early evening.

In this way Calvino animated_invisible cities as topologies of moments, whose_recombinations and recollections continue to haunt_imagistic projections and abstract modes_of knowledge._Released two years after the_publication of Invisible_Cities, Jonothan_Raban’s Soft City_(1974) offered a similar treatment of_the urban terrain_as intimately personal, and therefore malleable_and_indeterminate: “Decide who_you_are,_and the_city will again_assume_a fixed_form_around you” (Raban 1974: 1). The_fractured_identity of the modern condition was mirrored_in the malleability of_urban_space, as Raban’s narrative_itinerary teased out the many_from the singular, navigating agitated spaces_of illusion,_myth, aspiration_and nightmare. The dynamic of cities was presented as “plastic by_nature”, criss-crossing both the real and_the imagined, the voice_of commentary_mixing_it up with_the_musings of_a wondering, wandering traveler. Dense with labyrinthine_alleyways of_possibility and happenstance, Soft City presented_urban spaces “in our_images;_they, in turn, shape us by_the resistance they offer when we_try to impose our own_personal_form_on them” (Raban 1974: 1-2).

Both_writers offered their accounts of the_city not as_scholars of urbanism but instead as conjurors_of_stories. Jeannette Winterson (2001) has written_that_“[r]eading Calvino reading Venice is a_reminder_of_how often the controlled, measured_world of knowledge fails us. So_much of life resists the facts. Imagining Venice is_imagining yourself, as_Khan discovers – an unsettling_exercise,_but_necessary, perhaps.” At one point in his account of invisible_cities, Calvino_describes the way_Kublai Khan had focused so narrowly on a chessboard of_black and white squares that