From: Steve & Oxsana Marquis (marquis@nccn.net)
Date: Sat Apr 09 2005 - 15:02:01 BST
Wim asks:
_______________________
It intrigues me how spontaneity being potentially static can have cost you a
friendship and can have motivated your joining us. Can you tell me more?
_______________________
Hello Wim. This falls into the 'how much do you really want to know?'
category. I did mention it, so I owe something of an explanation.
This was a particular high quality friendship, going back some 40 years and
centered on intellectually quality. We went to the same Christian boarding
high school and had the same problems; inability to accept dogma w/o
explanation, not fitting in socially, etc. We both read Pirsig about the
same time, both had our first philosophy class from the same instructor at
the same junior college (an inspiration to us both, some teachers should be
cloned!).
And, for all these years, when we would visit, we would talk about
psychology and philosophy. Our discussion could include personal issues w/o
animosity, and we could disagree dispassionately, etc. Quite remarkable
really. I've had one other friendship like this and consider them to be
quite rare, something like the 'true' friendship described by Aristotle,
etc., for those familiar with that ideal.
A lot of our discussion centered around Pirsig; this was the common ground.
I did notice, however, as time went by, that our main focus was different,
his was society and relationship and mine was character and personal growth.
Also, looking back, there were a lot of queues I simply decided to ignore
about other differences. I could do this easily, since I was single and he
was a family man. That all changed when I got married and moved within
close proximity.
He stopped by one day to tell me what a lousy friend I was. Come to find
out there were certain social static patterns I had been expected to meet.
The fact that I'm an introvert and fairly quite socially had been quite
satisfactory all this time, but now I was expected to change. Part of this
expected behavior was the 'spontaneous' dropping by twice a week or so and
calling. This was his behavior, and he felt put off when he dropped in out
of the blue and, since, after several occurrences, I wouldn't stop what I
was engaged in any more to completely focus on visiting. He felt my static
habits were quite low quality.
Of course, some of this is true. I am quite the planner, and love nothing
better than to be 'into' a project.
My counter charge was to ask how his 'dynamic' approach was better. Where
was the quality in his life? Well, internally. He was happy. Any changes,
any growth planned? No. Having known him for this long I pointed out many
conversations recently that showed quite clearly he was not entirely at
peace. Further (and this is what was the last straw) I saw his behavior now
as quite the same from 30 years ago. He had not consciously adapted a
dynamic quality way of living, rather he was using Pirsig's philosophy to
justify his own habitual behavior, which includes this kind of aimless
non-focused spontaneity with all sorts of what I thought were unpreferred
consequences.
We have since had several talks, including a real interesting discussion of
caring, careful, and carefree, but that has about stopped. We are
'acquaintances' for our families sake, but the core of our friendship is
gone despite some effort on both our parts to mend fences.
Several points come to mind in attempting to figure out what happened. Our
dynamic and static differences were actually beneficial, an inspiration for
change and discussion in the other, when kept at a certain distance. The
interaction of families and living close removed that distance.
I have yet to figure out why my introversion, acceptable for such a long
time, is now not. Maybe it was a burr under the saddle and I didn't notice,
but expected family socializing gave the opportunity for the point to be
made. The value my friend places on relationship was certainly clear, but
why certain rituals to achieve that goal are required was not.
I have been looking into compulsive behavior for my own sake (excessive
'static ness' I suppose) and contrariness on my friend's part to see if
there are really any standards out there that one can clearly point at. The
problem with this, of course, is society's norms are not norms at all but
either just descriptive averages or institutionalized expectations based on
the static social patters of a particular culture.
It became obvious I need more input into understanding Pirsig. Not just
that the two of us have lost the ability to hear the other, but we have had
only the books and each other's opinion for so long. We really need others
to interact with to get a better grasp of things. That's where MD comes in.
It is obvious now why I claim veneration of the dynamic can be a trap. If
we put forth some static pattern as preferable it is subject to empirical
testing and / or rational analysis. The dynamic, however, is conveniently
removed from criticism.
Tanks Wim for your interest. Also, appreciate you view on habits, both
personal and social. Makes sense.
So far I like what I see here. Sam referred to 'bickering'. I think that's
healthy. Several of Pirsig's claims are being challenged, and that seems
healthy also. I have a lot of catching up to do, a lot of reading, such as
Anthony's thesis if I figure out how to get it, and many of the group's
essays.
I am working of course, and in the middle of a remodel, not to mention
trying to find time for my daughter. So, bear with me. I cannot respond to
everyone's replies as quick as I'd like. I have stayed out of several
interesting threads just to avoid getting overwhelmed.
Live well,
Steve
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
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 : Sat Apr 09 2005 - 15:33:45 BST