Amidst the beautiful images, grandiose metaphors, exquisite story, and full characters, Asterios Polyp quietly, ever-so quietly tosses out a small theme that I would like to shine some light on. The Shadow. The Doppelganger.
Asterios Polyp calls upon a wide breadth of characters to portray a fair story chronicling a slice in the life of the protagonist, however, the protagonist is not the narrator. Mazzucchelli presents the discourse through the unseeing (in a literal sense) of Asterios’ identical twin. This is no small decision. Identical twins have often been the subject of discussions; if not for medical purposes and case studies, certainly for the cultural, religious, academic, philosophical, and any other themes that I may have missed. Historic cultural folklore and belief of some civilizations regarded twins as heavenly dieties, or appalling devilry. Greek Mythology often placed a dualistic nature upon twins; not-so-much in the light for good and evil, but more upon the fixtures for balance and harmony. Regard Apollo and Artemis, twins in the order of Zeus: Apollo for the sun, Artemis for the moon. Simply put, greek mythology rarely places a twins into a strict dichotomy, but there is something to be said for the balance of Asterios and Ignazio.
In our first encounter with Ignazio, Asterios appears to be upon the Greek Parthenon (or ruins of something similar), clearly flashing the heavy greek theme the book will illustrate. Without hesitation or doubt, Asterios calls to Ignazio by name. Pretty good recognition for an individual he has never met; then again, Asterios is dreaming, and this is his twin. Mazzucchelli presents a discourse with a narrator of perfect proportions; who better to tell the story of Asterios than a character he can instantly recall in his sleep. Who could do better justice than his twin. However, here, Ignazio appears to be on a bed-of-passing, Asterios towering above him in visitation.
Our next “Ignazio visitation” is quite charming, clearly he’s been resuscitated but through Asterios; here, they are at the same point in life. We fully observe the difference in the eyes between Asterios and Ignazio here; Asterios has the simple pupil while it is Ignazio who retains the incut, unrevealing eye that Asterios normally maintains (outside of his dreams). Mazzucchelli illustrates Asterios’ non-revealing eyes when he is with Hana; with these eyes Asterios has the ability to be worldy intelligent, controlling, and self-absorbantly cocky. In fact, throughout Polyp, we observe Ignazio steal away the life of Asterios, until the moment Asterios fights to take his life back.
Ignazio is more than just the narrator: he is more than the still-born twin, more than a replication of Asterios in his dreams. Ignazio is, in fact, presented to be the doppelganger of Asterios. Ignazio is the blindness of achievement to the truths of true success. Ignazio is the voice of philosophy to Asterios’ will of creation. Ignazio, he IS the life of Asterios.
I was also captivated by the presence of Ignazio throughout the novel, plus the idea of these outside forces watching and controlling one’s life. I like the reference Travis uses of Ignazio as a ‘shadow’ – he exists and is real in Asterios’s life and the readers because he is the narrator of the story, but he is also the hollow, nonexistent figure we see drawn as alongside Asterios. It is similar to Ursula’s belief in the cosmos, which have a no physical presence in her life but nevertheless frame and control her life. And when looking back through the book I was struck by the occurrence of natural phenomenon throughout the novel. Obviously the novel ends with the asteroid, but I forgot/missed the connections of phenomenon throughout the novel. Does this reflect a morbid outlook on our place in this world and how little control we have over our lives?
I think we can see this reflected in the use of Ignazio as the narrator. As the readers we are being influenced and controlled in our reading by a nonexistent force. I felt this in particular in the instances when Ignazio is given form, which made me question the reality of his existence but then we are reassured that it is just Asterios’s dream. This blurring of reality and fiction made me question the ending of the novel. Is the asteroid real? Does it really hit the house? Or does this offer more of a connection to the cyclical nature of nature itself and life which we have no say in? Ignazio represents what Asterios does not have and what was taken from him in being a twin – what he did not have control over from birth. Asterios should believe more in Ursula’s words considering he is living controlled by his dead twin and by what the sky brings him.
Wow. It’s amazing to me that I missed this completely, and I really mean completely. I knew Asterios had a twin Ignazio, but I did not at all catch that he was the narrator of the story. Looking back through I figured out where I misread the image-word meaning: the fetus images at the end of the first chapter. The narrator actually says, “that’s me.” I assumed, for some reason, that that was Asterios. But this really does add a new dimension to the story. I was going to type “layer” but that’s too small a word for what this is. It’s also really interesting that Asterios and Ignazio actually talk to each other outside of the dream world. This is when Asterios and the narrator are expanding upon the idea that things don’t exist in black and white, but rather upon a continuum:
The narrator: “But why must choices always lie along a linear spectrum with two poles, instead of, say among a sphere of possibilities?”
Asterios: “It’s just a convenient organizing principle.” “By Choosing Two aspects of a subject that appear to be in opposition, each can be examined in light of the other in order to better illuminate the entire subject.”
Narrator: “As long as one doesn’t mistake the system for reality.”
Asterios: “Exactly.”