Hi Danila, Roger, Marco and All:
Permit me to jump in to offer a definition of art that comes right out
of the American Heritage Dictionary and greatly disentangles the
definitions you offered.
ART 1 (a) The conscious production or arrangement of sounds,
colors, forms, movement, or other element in a manner that
affects the sense of beauty, specifically the production of the
beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium. (b) The study of these
activities. (c) The product of these activities; human works of
beauty considered as a group. 2. High quality of conception or
execution, as found in works of beauty, aesthetic value.
There are a few other definitions listed, but for purposes of the
MOQ, the above points to the essence of art, namely, beauty.
Now it seems to me that because beauty can be found in all four
levels, just as DQ can be found everywhere, beauty must be (as
DQ is) a separate category of its own above all levels.
Some have argued that beauty and DQ are synonymous. Perhaps
so. But in Chap. 30 of "Lila" Pirsig writes, "Static social and
intellectual patterns are only an intermediate level of evolution." If
we take him at his word, then there are new levels, above the
intellectual, to come. And the next new level, as Pirsig suggested,
might be called a "code of art."
This will involve further discussion, of course. But if we can agree
on the definition above we won't get bogged down in endless
arguments about what we're talking about.
I agree with you that keeping things simple is desirable. Perhaps
this will help toward that end.
Look forward to your comments.
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:54 BST