From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Thu Mar 27 2003 - 15:56:00 GMT
Hi Steve, Rick:
STEVE:
> As a definition of "intellectual art," we might consider Ayn Rand's
views
> on art. She thought art should depict what could be and what should be.
> She said that this was Aristotle's view as well. However, with her
> Objectivism she parts company with Pirsig (and probably Platt?) as she
> rejects the notion of the artist as a sort of mystic, channeling some other
> non-objective reality. In MOQ terms, she rejects art as a response to DQ
> within a framework of existing static patterns and that someone can have a
> DQ experience of art as Pirsig described in the "hearing a new song and
> buying the record" part of Lila which he used to distinguish static and
> dynamic quality.
>
> Though art could reveal an intellectual truth, I see an aspect of great art
> as being a mediator of DQ experience for many people over many years.
> (Some may object that DQ is unmediated?) Though as static patterns change,
> the greatness is more of a static pattern of being an influence on other
> art.
PLATT
The "truth" revealed by great art is not an "intellectual truth" but rather
the truth of what it is to be alive and human. It is "intuitive truth," an
immediate perception of Quality, preconceptual and therefore
inexplicable. So I see great art as Steve does, as a catalyst for the DQ
experience. As I wrote previously, Rand ignores man's intuitive nature
and thus misses art's fundamental purpose.
RICK
Your 'criteria for artistic quality' sounds, in many respects, reminiscient
of Pirsig's defintion of the intellectual level...
PIRSIG:
"For purposes of MOQ precision, let's say the intellectual level is the
same as mind. It is the collection and manipulation of symbols, created
in the brain, that stand for patterns of experience."
RICK
Given this definition and your feelings about Quality in art.... Do you
think that works of art which reveal truths about life are kinds of
intellectual patterns that stand for patterns of experience?
PLATT
Yes, the artist uses symbols to stand for patterns of experience. But
rather than using symbols to create intellectual patterns to convey
intellectual truths about the (supposedly) amoral world, he uses
symbols to create aesthetic patterns to convey intuitive truths about the
Quality world. In SODV, Pirsig writes:
"The arts explore the Conceptually Unknown in other ways to create
patterns such as music, literature, painting, that reveal the Dynamic
Quality that produced them."
I think artistic, aesthetic patterns are distinctly different from intellectual
patterns although of course there is some overlap. Pirsig's novels are
excellent examples of combining intellectual and aesthetic patterns.
I find art endlessly fascinating. But in talking about it rather than directly
experiencing it, I can be rightly accused of being parasitic. Oh, what the
heck. Getting drunk, picking up bar ladies and talking about art is part
of life. :-)
Platt
P.S. Of course, if you're a postmodernist, there's no such thing as
"intuitive truth," only "intersubjective agreement." You can draw your
own conclusion about what that means for the arts.
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 : Thu Mar 27 2003 - 15:59:49 GMT