roger,
another challenging and outstanding response. i have fewer questions
this time but more comments.
> You asked if Pirsig uses the terms Quality and Experience synonymously.
> Basically, the answer is yes. Quality is an event. It is the present, the
> here and now, the preintellectual reality, the non intellectual awareness,
> the continuing stimulus... (terms taken at random from pages221 to 225 ZMM).
> It is Pure Experience. It is Dynamic Quality.
i should have seen this myself. in my thesis, i am making the point
that rhetoric, too, is an event; it is an art (techne) in that it
requires conscious choices to create/restore/respond (to) Quality. one
aspect that i think phaedrus is reacting to in the classroom scenes is
the objectification of rhetoric-- grammar, spelling, etc. it's the
mistake gorgias made when socrates questioned him about rhetoric;
socrates objectified rhetoric, equating it with pandering, by using a
knife to divide it. rhetoric (i argue) is the mediator of Quality (as
opposed to plato's dialectic to arrive at the Truth). this is why
phaedrus did not define "unity" to his students, relying on the use of
ostensive definition through example (just as he did with showing them
Quality in writing).
for me, the snippet above from your post lends credence to your
assertion that all experience is dynamic because each experienced event
is new and different. (was it herroclitus who said "a man can stick his
foot in a river and never touch the same water twice"?)
> I would recommend staying away from your term Romantic Understanding if
> possible. If you must stick with the Romantic/Classical division, my
> suggestion would be to at least change your terms to "Romantic Awareness"and
> "Classical Understanding". The awareness vs understanding distinction
> implies the immediacy and pre-intellectual nature of Dynamic Quality as
> opposed to the past, less real intellectual constructs of reality we call
> static quality.
understood. i guess what i was getting at was the difference in
worldviews between, say, john and the narrator about maintenance. . . .
what causes john to not care about maintenance? his understanding or
worldview doesn't value it. so maybe "worldview" is even a better term
to for what i'm getting at. still, it doesn't capture what i'm trying
to get at in terms of pirsig's metaphysics.
david b touched on what i was getting at in his response:
>Its a bit of a strech, but one could almost say that the classic/romantic split >is portrayed as a difference in personality, taste and style. They're two
>ways of looking at the world.
and, sure enough, he even uses "ways of looking at the world" (i just
saw this as i did the cut/paste) to describe what i am describing.
i'll have to think about this more at a later time.
> Sometimes of course, we can hear the same song for
> the thousandth time, but all the sudden we can find a new flash of hidden
> brilliance arise from what we thought was old and familiar..... DQ again
> emerges!
excellent point. this re-emergence speaks on many levels and is
expressed in a variety of ways in different fields, philosophies,
disciplines, etc.
one of those "ways" was in a recent post by elg14:
>I also wrote something about driving and how people learn proper driving skills >and then go on automatic pilot (second nature) from then on. What I think of >as "third nature" involves re-awakening those static patterns for the sake of >improving one's driving skills to the point that you really become an asset on >the road.
now elg14 calls it a "re-awakening" of "static patterns" but the result
is dynamic (a change or improvement in driving skills). very similar.
i also see the application of this re-emergence in the field of
composition. in the (linear or recursive) writing process, one of the
last steps is to "revise" a draft, to "see it again." if each
experience is DQ, then it would explain the existence of craft, let
alone art itself (is there really a distinction, though?).
when revision can't take place, when static patterns remain asleep, when
DQ doesn't re-emerge, perhaps this is what pirsig meant by "stuckness,"
especially in terms of value rigidity. i'm not sure, though.
> A squad member named Walter has an interesting thought experiment that
> involves an alzheimers victim. Theoretically, they could hear a song every
> day, and always find it fresh and exciting. They would fail to latch onto a
> changed state. Thinking about this scenario brings clarity to DQ and sq and
> the need for balance and growth..
this is very intriguing. however, when i read this, it made me think
that because their "chemistry" (as Vonnegut put it in _Hocus Pocus_)
isn't working "normally" that DQ is not present in every experience.
the lack of "awareness" of previous experience would logically make
repeated experiences of the song "new." this usually doesn't happen
with non-alzheimer's patients (i'm hesitant to consider deja-vu here--
though there seems to be a connection of some sort with it in relation
to this, despite being a different condition). sq isn't manifest in
these patients-- it doesn't exist. but it does for us, suggesting that
sq does exist and each experience of the song event is not DQ. have i
just re-interpreted what you said? i'm starting to confuse myself.
> Putting all this together, I would suggest that there are two ways to pursue
> DQ. First, we can always pursue fresh new experience. As a listener, we
> could seek new songs and explore new genres. As a musician or composer, we
> could expand our art in new directions. Second, we can attend more toward our
> current experience. Really listen. When playing, play with total focus.
> Find the quality within. The pursuit of DQ in our everyday life is the
> message of Lila. Unfortunately, most people have built static filters as
> thick as a mountain around themselves. Their life is a stream of stale
> patterns that are rarely cherished.
these "static filters" could be the same as a self-imposed "stuckness."
stuck within the mythos.
> As for your question on how the MOQ views artists, I think the artist (or
> scientist) is one who can attend to experience. They can find DQ in the
> routine and convey it to others. They are intuitively familiar with the form
> and structure of the mythos (the accumulated patterns of society and thought)
> and are able to light a fire of experience.
well put. i agree wholehearedly.
> One final angle on the MOQ and art. Over time, Art progresses and evolves
> dynamically. Artists find yesterday's quality to be static and routine. They
> step out dynamically to new unexplored horizons. This process continues
> indefinitely. The problem is that they eventually risk losing their
> audience. Only those as steeped in the art as themselves can follow the
> advance. To the layman, the new art can appear chaotic. I find examples of
> this in modern painting, sculpture, poetry, writing, 20th century atonal
> music, bebop's extension into free jazz, etc.
this is quite compelling. i think it must be remembered, however, that
we do "stand on the shoulders of giants." that's not to say that we
blindly accept what others before us have said, created, thought as
perfect (including pirsig), ultimately reproducing what's already been
done-- mimickry-- but to take what has been done and how it has been
done and reinterpret it-- through differnt contexts and content.
artists use their own "rhetoric" to show us these things thourgh their
creative use of it. they are mediating, demonstrating Quality, using
their own analogues (and those of the culture) in fresh and unique
ways. abstract art (pirsig explains it better than i do) "fails" to
reveal Quality when someone is "stuck" in his/her concept of art;
they're too rigid in their definition/value of art. [sometimes, though,
artists go outside of conventions and find something quite abstracted
from the art experience that alienates and occludes the audience (i feel
some performance artists fall in this category).]
a writing teacher, then, who only considers a five-paragraph essay as
"correct" would object to a writer who creates an essay in three
paragraphs and withholds the thesis until the last sentence of the last
paragraph (instead of the last sentence of the first paragraph).
i'd speculate that a good artist is aware not only of the present but
the past and the future as well. that's part of the argument i'm trying
to make about the student writer.
let me know your thoughts on these ramblings.
jamie
MOQ Online Homepage - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Unsubscribe - http://www.moq.org/md/index.html
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:07 BST