them.â
âYouâre afraid that theyâll fall on you while youâre asleep and smother you?â she suggested.
âNo,â I said. âItâs not that. Itâsâlook at the way the mapmakers vary the thickness of the lines that represent roads and highways, and the way they use different colors.â
âVery nice,â she said.
âButâsuppose they make these maps in such a way that they tend to lead the traveler astray?â
âAstray?â
âI mean, what if they lead people to their gas stations?â
âWhat?â she asked.
âAll the gas companies make maps like these and give them out at their stations, right?â
âRight.â
âSuppose they make the roads going past their stations look more attractive or more interesting, so that people will choose those routes and wonât choose other routes, where the gas stations that sell other kinds of gas are located.â
âYouâre nuts,â she told me.
âMaybe,â I admitted.
To test my theoryâand Spikeâs, I supposeâI wrote to other gas companies. I compared their mapsâ depictions of the roads along the route that I intended to follow with the version offered by the company that owned the station where my father worked. I imagined traveling the routes that the maps depicted, and tried to decide whether I was being steered toward each companyâs gas stations. After many long hours of thought experimentation, I came to the conclusion that the maps could not be trustedâand, simultaneously, I discovered that the trip so often taken in my imagination had grown stale.
So I refreshed the trip that had grown stale by deciding to travel without a map. Why travel with a map that youâve decided you canât trust anyway? I took all the maps down from my walls and ceiling, folded them up, and put them away in my closet.
Having no map forced me to ask directions of strangers, and along the way I learned that doing so leads to fascinating exchanges, exchanges that are, more often than not, useless, but fascinating nonetheless. If I had it to do over again (in actuality, not in memory, as I am doing it now), I think I might travel with a map. Iâve decided that theyâre more trustworthy than I thoughtâand they are much more trustworthy than the advice of strangers.
Chapter 2
Our Little Secret
I AM SOMETIMES asked to explain the secret of the happiness that Albertine and I have found in each otherâs company over all the years that we have been together, through thick and thin and through thin and thinner, and when asked I admit quite frankly that the secret is our nearly perfect balance of induced and dynamic lift.
Lift, on a wing, on an airplane, is a matter of relative pressure: less pressure above, pressing down; more pressure below, pushing up. When the pressureâs off above and on below, we rise. I am a great believer in lift, unlike Wolfgang Langewiesche, who, in his Stick and Rudder: An Explanation of the Art of Flying, disparaged lift. It might be fair to say that Langewiesche pooh-poohed the whole idea of lift, coming very close to calling it an illusion, as close as Kurt Gödel came to calling time an illusion in âA Remark About the Relationship Between Relativity Theory and Idealistic Philosophy,â his contribution to the 1949 Festschrift volume, Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist. For Langewiesche, the upward mobility of a forward-moving airplane is the result of the reaction of the undersurface of the wing to the force of the air below the wing when the airplaneâs engine pushes the wing against the air below it at a sufficient angle of attackâthat is, with a sufficient upward slant. The air pushes the wing up, in Langewiescheâs view, and the wing neednât be an airfoil; it might as well be a sheet of plywood; it could be any plane surface at all. Hence, Langewiesche points