From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Mon Mar 15 2004 - 21:58:37 GMT
Hey Poot,
> Platt:
> For me, art and beauty can make a direct connection to Dynamic Quality.
> That's my religion. IMO there's none better.
> -Pirsig:
> "Now, as the first step of the crystallization process, he saw
> that when Quality is kept undefined by definition, the entire field called
> esthetics, is wiped out. . . completely disenfranchised... kaput. By
> refusing to define Quality, you can't define Quality, there's no way you
> can subordinate it to any intellectual rule. The estheticians can have
> nothing more to say. Their whole field, definition of Quality, is gone."
Wholeheartedly agree. The philosophical field of aesthetics, words about
art and beauty, is a complete waste. As I've said before, the only valid
thing in art is the one thing that cannot be explained. As for beauty,
like DQ, it's an intuitive, not an intellectual concept.
Platt
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 : Mon Mar 15 2004 - 21:57:43 GMT