Miv, Wiltrud, Keith, Jon et al,
Good and interesting posts and there are some questions as well.
But first I'd like to add another facette to what we have.
"Lila didn't know he was here. She was sound asleep, apparently in some
fearful dream. In the darkness he heard a grating sound of her teeth and
felt her body suddenly turn as she struggled against some menace only she
could see."
" The light from the open hatch above was so dim it concealed whatever
lines of cosmetics and age were there and now she looked softly cherubic,
like a small girl with blond hair, wide cheekbones, a small turned up nose,
and a common child's face that seemed so familiar it attracted a certain
natural affection. He got the feeling that when morning came she should pop
open her sky-blue eyes and they should sparkle with excitement at the
prospect of a new day of sunlight and parents smiling and maybe bacon
cooking on the stove and happiness everywhere."
The light from the open hatch - Lila and the man are not in a house, in a
different place, and there is only a little bit of light hiding something
and uncovering something else at the same time. He sees an underlying
quality - softly cherubic - angel like beyond time and beyond a possible
facade applied by Lila +. Softly cherubic - A christian symbol for the '
good ' shines through. " Like a small girl with blond hair, wide cheekbones,
a small turned up nose - this is a detailed description of the raphaelic
angels if You ask me. A deepening of the angelic picture.
But then:
- " and a common child's face that seemed so familiar it attracted a certain
natural affection. " This is an antagonism IMO ( = in my opinion Wiltrud)
He already described her face sufficiently in the first part of the
sentence. So why should he go on with the description if he has not
something important to add ?
There comes something important = and (on the other hand) " a common child's
face ". And he feels an affection towards the common child's face via a
certain familiarity as if he knows her or someone like her. A natural
affection, a preintellectual impulse. He responds to the concealed in a
time/space continuum based side.
The response is a wish:
He got the feeling that when morning came she should pop
open her sky-blue eyes and they should sparkle with excitement at the
prospect of a new day of sunlight and parents smiling and maybe bacon
cooking on the stove and happiness everywhere."
I see this as the definition of his affection and a consequence of his
pre-intellectual choice
(And here she is DQ for the first time in the book - I could not resist
stating that and I get an idea how David and the other 'Giants' feel).
He wishes something for her - a home - a welcome - an innocent beginning
and taking of the new day - a shelter and a frame. Essential for all boys
and girls living a real world life.
" a new day of sunlight " - joy . "parents smiling" - shelter and affection.
"bacon cooking on the stove" - pleasant anticipation and secure fullfillment
of basic needs.
All of this is very down to earth.
Now some comments on other posts but I am not going to leave sacred and
sufficiently explored ground -).
Miv writes:
I feel a certain discomfort with the first chapter of Lila. I do not find it
as engaging as the rest of the book. There is a feeling of uneasiness, a
slow start , it doesn't quite flow (until HE finds out he can dance...).
It is a slow start and easy to rush through. But why do You find it not as
engaging as the rest of the book? Due to the fact that here is no
metaphysical or philosophical content ?
You go on:
Who is he? what kind of person is there next to Lila in bed? We get a
glimpse into his mind, how he thinks about her. he is very perceptive, but
also somewhat detached. I identify with his personality
I agree with what You say. A lot of readers will identify and he is somewhat
detached though good willing. Would he like to take part in the day he wants
Lila to have ? It is a very strong sentence in an emotional sense.
I also find it interesting what You write about the latter part of Chap. 1.
But I can not say anything on that because IMO that leads to far for now.
Wiltrud writes:
. can't we all only see her (and the book and its meaning
and THE meaning) drearily lighted by our subjectivity. But this is the
chance we are given.
I do not really see what You mean here. I have an approx. Idea.
Jonathan writes:
However, I must yet again draw attention to the very first word "Lila".
I find it very hard to believe that Pirsig had never heard the word in
its Hindu context after his years of philosophical study including a
long stretch in India. He didn't exactly push out Lila the novel in any
great hurry, and I assume that he wrote it with a great deal of care (it
certainly looks that way). For Pirsig to have simply "overlooked" the
Hindu meaning of Lila would indicate uncharacteristic carelessness (to
RMP, if you are reading this, I apologise if this looks offensive
because it isn't intended to be).
If I remember right Big P wrote that he did not know anything about the Lila
of the vedas in a letter to Anthony Mc Watt. Our (?) or at least my approach
is to see the book as written by god (as suggested on the slow reading site
(http://www.freelance-academy.org/slowread.htm). Ergo we (?) or at least I
can not doubt this statement.
And what is the consequence ?
Jon heads on:
There's nothing new about Lila. She is a picture that we can see a
thousand times and still love. Pirsig is showing us the GOOD in the
familiar.
- may I add, compared to the first paragraph ?
Let's put the emphasis on the 'and' in the middle of the sentence and see
what we have:
The light from the open hatch above was so dim it concealed whatever
lines of cosmetics and age were there and now she looked softly cherubic,
like a small girl with blond hair, wide cheekbones, a small turned up nose,
AND a common child's face that seemed so familiar it attracted a certain
natural affection.
As You might see here and from the accompanying explanation in my post
earlier on, there is the first glimpse of an antagonism and a pre
intellectual decision by 'him'.
I must go now though I'd like to comment on Keith's post as well.
(Well I am my own boss but what would I do with an co-worker not working for
two hours AND blocking the computer for his own purposes.)
Take Good care and thanx for listening,
Andreas
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jan 17 2002 - 13:08:33 GMT