From: Matt the Enraged Endorphin (mpkundert@students.wisc.edu)
Date: Wed Jan 29 2003 - 01:50:23 GMT
Erin,
Erin said:
Well I know this has been pointed out many
times before but isn't it fair to consider
that quote is from Phaedrus not Pirsig's
perspective. I think its not very good to put so much
weight on a single quote by a character.
Especially what Pirsig said about identifying
him with a character.
Matt:
Fair enough. This actually makes interpreting ZMM all the more interesting
with the dynamic between the narrator and Phaedrus. But then, of course,
being as there is no Pirsig in the books, only Phaedrus (as continuous
through to Lila), it might be fairer to say that the MoQ is a creation of
Phaedrus, but where does that leave us with the philosophy? Does it change
it all that much? It may create built-in irony in the books (which only
fuels my preferred reading), but what about the SODV paper? There is no
Phaedrus there and I'm not sure the philosophy changes all that much.
And its not just that quote. There are many other places (of which Platt
has tapped the tip of the iceberg) that Pirsig talks like this. The "now
and forever" quote simply gives us a suggestion as to how we should
interpret all the other more ambiguous places. Now, I favor reading out
all the "now and forever" parts, but I still want to insist that we keep in
mind the ambiguities.
Matt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 29 2003 - 01:45:37 GMT