From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sun Mar 07 2004 - 02:09:47 GMT
Steve, Platt and all:
dmb says:
I think Steve has done a good job taking on Platt's view of music and art
and mostly agree with him. Its not that I have anything against Mozart or
The Mona Lisa, but to supply a list of the most acclaimed composers as a
description of the best art strikes me as painfully stale, as a kind of
elitism without imagination. In any case, I'd like to add a few thoughts
about two of the quotes Steve presented along the way...
In ZAMM chapter 21 Pirsig says:
Art is high-quality endeavor. That is all that really needs to be said. Or,
if something more high-sounding is demanded: Art is the Godhead as revealed
in the works of man. The relationship established by Phædrus makes it clear
that the two enormously different sounding statements are actually
identical.
dmb says:
Clearly, when Pirsig says "art is the Godhead as revealed in the works of
man" he is talking about Gregorian chants and paintings of Jesus and stuff
like that. Just kidding. If the Godhead can be found in lotus flowers and
motorcycle gears equally, and bike repair is an art, I see no reason why
should expect to find more divinity in an orchestra than in an electric
guitar. Don't get me wrong. I'm just as big a snob as the next guy. Its just
that experience has convinced me that mind-blowing art can come from
something as humble as the naked human voice. In fact, in our time there is
a certain soullessness, sterility and emptiness about the highly polished
and overly produced music that dominates the form. Great paintings have
become commodities, investments, status symbols and ranked celebrities in
their own right. Their value AS a work of art has all but been lost in all
that. But the next quote is even better...
Pirsig also says this in his intro to LC:
Philosophy itself is opinions of the speaker himself about the general
nature of the world, not just a classification someone else's opinions. This
may seem a minor point but I remember hearing many years ago how a professor
of art, Jerry Liebling, was outraged when he heard that an Art Historian
told one of his students that he should give up painting because it was
obvious the student would never equal the great masters. ...Liebling loathed
this attitude of Art Historians because, while they thought they were
preserving the standards of art, they were in fact destroying them. Art is
not just the static achievements of the masters of the past. Art is the
creative Dynamic Quality of the artist of the present. Neither is philosophy
just the static achievements of the masters of the past. Philosophy is the
creative Dynamic Quality of the philosopher of the present."
dmb says:
I'm convinced that Pirsig is describing a principle that applies to much
more than just painting and philosophy. The DQ of the painter in the
present, the DQ of the philosopher in the present. DQ in the present. That's
what its all about. I tend to think of the static achievements of the past
are a good sign that the artist was in touch with "the Godhead" and the
canvasses they leave behind are certainly "art" in the normal sense of the
word. But I think Pirsig's description of art as an "endevor" tells us that
art is a verb. Its a kind of activity that produces things we call art. And
since the real motorcyle you're working on is your self,... Was it Pirsig,
or did he quote somebody else? Somebody said that its easy to paint a
perfect picture. All you have to do is be perfect and then paint naturally.
See what I'm getting at?
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 : Sun Mar 07 2004 - 02:13:05 GMT