Hi Roger, (Bo, Magnus) and Squad,
>On 254 of ZMM, Pirsig writes "Romantic Q is the
>cutting edge of experience." He then goes on to say pretty much what
you
>did....."The leading edge is where all the action is. The leading edge
>contains all the infinite possibilities of the future."
Thanks for that quote Roger. I reread Chapter 24 in ZMM (different pages
in my edition) where Pirsig uses this image as part of the boxcar
analogy. I note that he really does say "Romantic Quality" (see Magnus,
he did say RQ, and not just R understanding). Bo consistently belittles
ZMM vs. Lila and regards this Romantic-Classic view as an abortive
attempt to characterize Quality which was superseded by the DQ-SQ
scheme. However, my rereading convinces me that this Romantic-Classic
division is just as valid as it was when I first read it 22 years ago.
What I now see though is that Pirsig had not yet recognized DQ, and thus
his "leading edge" of reality is wrongly identified as RQ. I understood
RQ to be made of perceptions like the beauty of a painting or music, or
the taste of chocolate, which are mostly static value patterns. Neither
can one say that Classical Quality is a static product of RQ; Chapter 22
talks about Poincare's "subliminal self" (preintellectual awareness)
which picks out the classic beauty of e.g. a mathematics solution for
attention. IMO Classic and Romantic views were supposed to correspond to
objectivism and subjectivism, except that they both contained an
aesthetic element, and would both contain the dynamic means for their
realization. Those two additions are Pirsig's hallmark, and completely
consistent with he philosophy he builds in Lila.
Regards, Jonathan
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:35 BST