**SPOILERS FOR PIRANESI BY SUSANNA CLARKE**
TL;DR The Way Piranesi perceives and records time and space is fundamentally opposite of the Other World and is perhaps a much better way of doing things.
*Piranesi* by Susanna Clarke has quickly become one of my favorite books of all time. I know many people have enjoyed the book and likewise, I have enjoyed the past through days scrolling through forums (especially on this subreddit) to see what others think of it and how they interpret the events told within. I wanted to offer another perspective, my own, and open a discussion for some of my ideas about the themes and imagery that I felt were important. That being said, I am by no means an expert analyst of literature or literary themes, which is why I seek to learn from others as well.
(INSERT) I am writing this paragraph after I have written the body of my post to say that due to a fear that I’ve already written far too long of string of consciousness that I’d better parse out all of my thoughts in a less dense way. I had planned to write many more of my initial thoughts but during my writing here I soon found that I had a lot more to say about each one than I first thought. This post will, consequently, only about my thoughts on the topic of Time and Space in *Piranesi* but I had also many thoughts on things like Life/Art in reference to Imitation, Social and Individual conscience, and also certain aspects of the writing conventions and tools used in the book like Capitalization and Unreliable Narration (I believe the latter is *not* in the book despite what I’ve read from other posts).
\-Time & Space-
The first aspect of the book I’d like to bring up is the representation of the House and the significance of its architecture and nature. By design, I think the House’s layout is supposed to be uninterpretable, or at least vague, and even though we are given exact locations and records of Piranesi’s methodology for mapping out the World, there are not easily interpretable foundations for his system other than that he has designated the first Vestibule as base for which all the other Halls and Vestibules are numbered (I thought about it from the perspective in which the House is laid out on an infinite grid with the first Vestibule being the origin, or “0,0” on a geometric plane with the rooms being numbered based on their distance from this point as Piranesi describes). This did not really help me fully understand the layout however. Of course, the way Piranesi names the rooms can give a great idea of the general region in relation to the first Vestibule that they are located but it is not something we can so easily interpret through reading Piranesi’s journal.
That being said, the way Piranesi numbers things geographically but not chronologically is a very interesting contrast to the Other World, so to speak. That is, Piranesi abandons the traditional method of keeping time and instead relies on monumental moments or events to describe each instance of time, where as his reference for geographical data is designated by an ordered number system as opposed to the Other World that uses nonsense words like “Birmingham” or “Battersea” to denote places. I think this is the first indicator that the House is fundamentally opposed to the Other World in respect to perception of time and space. In the Other World, time is numbered and bears no respect to the events that have taken place within it and therefore becomes further and further disconnected to said events. This is to say that timekeeping in the Other World is largely to the benefit of those in the present and is little to do with those who lived in the past. For Piranesi, however, time is marked by occasion, not by number. In this way he fundamentally contrasts the idea that time is some sort of present time keeping tool and is itself a Monument and Testament to the things that take place in an otherwise rigid and unchanging House. The geographic labelling is the antithesis to Piranesi’s time keeping and also opposite to geographic denotation used in the Other World. In the Other World it is not time, but the places that are labelled uniquely for their remarkability.
I think this contrast is illustrated quite well especially towards the end of the book. The interaction that stood out to me was when Piranesi was speaking with Raphael and becomes mildly annoyed at her for suggesting that he must want to see a “real” mountain and then retorts that if anything, a statue of a mountain in a place where “real” mountains do not exist is just as gratifying an experience if not more so. To me, the treatment of space and time as they differ between Worlds is actually not a testament to the World’s differences but to their similarities and how Piranesi’s way of life is how we *ought* to be living. In the other world, we fear that not only the world will change but that we will change with it. In order to combat this we may start numbering our years so that we may easily reference the past but as time goes on and the number grows bigger, it becomes impossible to remember anything remarkable between the numbers 0-2000 let alone to which number they belong. This is a thought Piranesi explains too with his methodology for labeling the years, if you were not there experiencing each individual year, what good would a number do to convey its significance? In the Other World we do not, and in fact probably *cannot* think like that. If we want to revisit the past, the only way we can is to go to the *places* that are marked for their events even though they are subject to change and destruction and cannot be a true representation of the time we wish to look back on. In this way our priorities are opposite to what they ought to be. We should not designate the only record keeping method we have that is inelastic to equally cold and unremarkable labels and likewise we should not give remarkable names to places and landmarks that cannot be viewed the same way as when they were named. These places will only ever be perceptible to you firsthand in the state that they are in as you look at them. You cannot comprehend the scope of a building or a natural landmark in any way other than when you yourself can perceive it, so instead of knowing *what* they are, you should know *where* they are so you can understand how they interact with *you* not the past, which is what Piranesi practices.
A scene I think best exemplifies this revelation is when Piranesi takes Raphael on a tour of the Halls before he decides to leave the House. Specifically his language as he conveys the images of the Coral Halls, where statues are overrun with coral growing on them. In the Other World we may describe them as corrupted, or eroded, a shadow of their original form. They are altered in a way that not only changes how we perceive them but changes how they can fundamentally *be* perceived. Piranesi, however, does not see the coral with contempt, and he does not long to see the statues as they were before being covered in coral. Instead he describes the vibrancy of their color and how they change the atmosphere and image of the statue on a fundamental level. Piranesi can only see these statues in the state they are now and appreciates them as such. In the Other World, a statue covered in coral could be viewed as tainted, something that needs to be restored. We may yearn to view the statue as the artist who sculpted it would have, instead of admiring it for what it is now.
So, I extend this analysis to you all. Is this comprehension and perception of time and space fundamentally different in the House than to how we practice the same sentiments? Do the differences matter? Are there differences at all?
by Finalost2