From: Wim Nusselder (wim.nusselder@antenna.nl)
Date: Sat Jun 26 2004 - 07:45:26 BST
Dear Platt,
You explained 20 Jun 2004 07:54:34 -0400 writing about transcendent
characteristics of beauty not being explained by the MoQ (while agreeing
that the association of art with DQ is THE MoQish explanation fo them) with:
'Pirsig should have given the association more emphasis. I'm afraid his
brief mention of the association is too easily passed over and forgotten.
For me, it's central to the concept of DQ. Thus, my explication and
affirmation.'
O.k., I can understand and sympathize with that as part of your 'art as
quality religion'.
You wrote 19 Jun 2004 11:12:54 -0400:
'Even though our ideas of beauty may change, beautiful patterns -unlike
biological, social and intellectual patterns -- don't evolve and improve
with time. The animal paintings by unknown early humans in the caves of
Lascaux have never been surpassed.'
Do they not evolve and in a sense improve by becoming more complex and
communicating more "Meaning"?
You continued:
'beauty transcends intellect. It is never true or false. It just is. Like
the universe itself, it has no intellectual meaning beyond its own presence,
and has no purpose other than to delight. Unlike intellect, it assumes
nothing, presumes nothing, explains nothing, solves nothing, teaches
nothing. It doesn't ask questions or supply answers. Yet it breathes fire
into the physicist's equations and reveals truths beyond our understanding.'
Is this still "true" if you use my definition of the 4th level (as
consisting of symbolic patterns)? In other words: does beauty transcend
symbolic representation? I guess it does, or rather that to the extent it
does, art can claim to reach beyond the 4th level.
You ended that batch of 'Notes on Beauty, Art and DQ' with:
'Above the realm of intellect, the MOQ's highest moral level, beauty rules.
Nobody has stopped looking at it, and no one has stopped enjoying the sight.
We are no more capable of turning a cold eye to beauty than
responding with indifference to a baby's cry. The aesthetic experience at
its highest intensity breaks through the intellect's dependence on
distinctions and divisions, and in a memorable if but fleeting moment, lays
bare the mystic unity of all.'
As long as we don't clearly experience patterns (that evolve and improve)
beyond the 4th level, I wouldn't call it a level yet. At most a nascent
level. For the rest I fully agree AND appreciate the aesthetic quality of
your description. I like your reference to mystic unity. It confirms my idea
that the nascent level which art can refer to is the same as the nascent
level which religion can refer to. Great post, Platt! Have you any more of
these 'Notes ...' to offer?
In your 16 Jun 2004 08:20:02 -0400 'Notes ...' you quoted Al Capp calling
'what passes for music in today's "culture"': 'a product of the untalented
sold by the unprincipled to the utterly bewildered'.
That strikes me as a valuable observation, but maybe a bit too harsh. The
booze that weakened the inhibitions of Pirsig's brujo against window peeping
can also be depicted as a product of people not able to produce better
quality products (peyote?) selling it just for profit to Indians whose
culture was already on the verge of breaking down under the pressure of the
culture of the more numerous American settlers. (Wasn't alcohol drinking
introduced to Indians by American settlers? Maybe the brujo was able to call
in his settler "friends" against the highest status representatives of his
society because of his contacts among them when buying booze?) A low quality
pattern may weaken a higher quality pattern and create room for a yet higher
pattern.
You wrote 14 Jun 2004 15:22:52 -0400:
'--What the world will eventually come to understand is the Metaphysics of
Quality, which asserts the world came into being because it was right that
it do so, the result of the Principle of Goodness. It is known in everyday
life simply as "Beautiful."'
And "Meaningful"/"Purposeful"/"Intuitively True"? But, yes these are less
used in everyday life than "Beautiful".
With friendly greetings,
Wim
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 26 2004 - 09:05:08 BST