RE: MD The Transformation of Love

From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sat Jun 14 2003 - 22:44:30 BST

  • Next message: David Buchanan: "RE: MD The Transformation of Love"

    Rick, Sam and all:

    Sam said:
    I think there is potential in the correspondence - eros = biological level
    love, agape = social
    level love, amor = fourth level love. I'll think about that some more, but
    it seems good (and
    eudaimonic!). Just as the higher levels are built upon the lower elsewhere,
    it seems to me that you
    can only have amor if the lower levels are also satisfied, which means,
    amongst other things, that
    adultery (to my mind) cannot be amor (although consider also the 'sex, lies
    and videotape' example I
    asked Paul about).

    dmb says:
    I'm grateful to Rick for introducing this issue. I'm quite psyched about it
    and find the conversation to be quite delicious. Except for some exceptional
    cases of adultry, I agree with you Sam. "The higher levels ARE built upon
    the lower ones." I think this is very much what Pirsig is saying. Descartes
    could only think because French culture existed first. All our intellectual
    descriptions are culturally derived. He says it lots of different ways, but
    the basic idea is only that the higher levels depend on the lower ones for
    their very existence. I want to focus on this troubadour thing, but I should
    mention that this is why Pirsig DOES NOT say that intellectual persons are
    "just level 4" or just "a collection of ideas". As I understand the MOQ,
    this is metaphysically impossible. By definition, an intellectual person
    MUST also include the first three levels first. As the author puts it, we
    are each "a forrest of static patterns" and the differences between people
    are just a matter of where the center of gravity lies, which values dominate
    that person. Anyway, getting back to amor and such...

    dmb continues:
    I don't know about the movie, but in the legend of Tristan and Isolde our
    hero has two girls, one he marries and one he loves. The defiance of social
    traditions for the sake of a higher love, that's what its all about. Adultry
    is just one of those social traditions. And it important to remember the
    context in which these defiant acts took place. Unlike today's world,
    adultry won't just bring shame and embarrasment, then it could get you
    tortured and killed and EVEN WORSE. Your immortal soul could be damned for
    eternity and yet they still defied the authorities and risked all that. In
    the legend of Abelard and Heloise, he is castrated and condemned as a
    heretic and she is forced into a convent. That is some kind of powerful
    love, eh? Naturally, that doesn't make every cheater a hero. I'd agree that
    most of the time adultry is not so auspicious, but in these legends amor and
    adultry go hand in hand.

    Sam said:
    BTW the quotes from Campbell were depressing, and display a mind-numbing
    conformity to conventional
    thinking. To say (of personal love) that "That's completely contrary to
    everything the Church stood
    for. It's a personal, individual experience, and I think it's the essential
    thing that's great
    about the West and that makes it different from all other traditions I know"
    simply displays
    astonishing historical ignorance. Where does he think the language for the
    troubadour tradition came
    from, if not from the 'Song of Solomon' and all the contemporaneous
    commentaries on it? Campbell
    seems blithely unaware that Bernard of Clairvaux was the generation before
    Chretien de Troyes, and
    that the troubadours adapted religious language for their purposes in just
    the same way that modern
    pop songs are derived from religious singing. (If you're interested, see
    'The discovery of the
    individual, 1050 - 1200", by Colin Morris). Grrrr!!

    dmb says:
    I don't think you can rightly accuse Campbell of ignorance without really
    knowing what he's got to say on the topic. Please trutst me on this. The
    quotes from Rick are just a small sample of a very large thing. He connects
    Christianity to these legends in lots of different ways. Nearly half of The
    Masks of God, which is two or three thousand pages of material in a four
    volume set reccomended by Pirsig, is devoted to unpacking various versions
    of these romantic legends. The broken hearted musician/lover can be seen in
    David and Orpheus, in Paul, in the mystics, in Christ and the Grail legends,
    the legends of abelard and tristan as well as the troubadours and countless
    other permutations. The thing you object to and find "a mind-numbing
    conformity to conventional thinking" is only what the troubadours themselves
    were saying! I can understand why a priest would feel uncomfortable with
    such a thing, but I hardly think you can blame the messenger here. The clash
    between the church and these lovers can be seen plainly by anyone who looks.
    (Amor is Roma backwards.) I mean, sometimes conventional views are very well
    founded, you know?

    More later,
    DMB

    P.S. Wasn't the Church of England founded to escape Rome's authority over
    Henry's 8th marriage? :-)

    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 Jun 14 2003 - 22:44:31 BST