LS Dynamic and Static Quality

From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sat May 29 1999 - 11:29:02 BST


Mr. Beasley and All:

I'm sending this without John's 5/28 post attached, but I hope to answer
it here.

John, apparently you're into art AND science. Call yourself a
generalist, perhaps? Anyway, I like the way you think, but we come to
different conclusions about Pirsig. I believe essence of your complaint
is that Quality is never really pinned down, and that "the
static/dynamic split does nothing to help". I get the feeling that
you're rather underwhelmed with the explanitory power of the MOQ. Maybe
you'll like my picture much better than your own view. Even if its not
correckt...

In the fourth paragraph you cite the dynamic song / static record
example from Lila. You say, "On each subsequent hearing the song becomes
staler, and while it never becomes 'bad' it does become static". But
stale is not the same as static. We're talking about static patterns of
Quality when we say static quality. We're talking about phenomenal
reality, not the mental depression caused by re-runs. The example just
shows one of the ways we can encounter DQ in everyday life. And I thinks
its meant to show that the experience isn't in the song and can't be
repeated by simply listening again. A new song might open a person up to
DQ for a moment, or it might not.

As I understand it, everything we can sense or define is made of static
patterns of Quality. In the big picture, I think Pirsig is saying that
the "physical" universe, the Earth with all its life forms, and we with
our societies and ideas are all made of static patterns of Quality.
There are lots of different kinds of these static patterns, and suppose
each is even unique on a certain scale. But Pirsig gives us the four
levels and the 5 codes to begin to sort it all out, as a tool to judge
the morality of any given situation. When we talk about static patterns,
we're talking about the world as we know it in a different framework.
Basically we've changed subjects and objects into four levels of static
patterns, but its all the usual stuff in the framework, so to speak. Its
not about freshness.

Those ancient biological patterns within him emerged as Lila pressed
against him. You know that kind of power. You know that feeling. It is
in all of us. It is good for reproduction, it feels good. But it can't
be allowed to subjegate higher level patterns of Quality. Its good on
its own level. Sex is about 10% of a rich, full life. And 90% of an
empty one. Pirsig's codes say that its proper for social quality to rule
over the biological. Marriage is a good thing, on the social level very
little is held higher. We even put it among the sacred, but its really
about controlling biologal quality. Again, static patterns are our
reality. Its the "stuff" we map as subjects and objects on the one hand
or as the four levels of SQ on the other hand. They both work as ideas,
but the MOQ doesn't ignore all my favorite things like SOM does.

Yea, I think Dynamic Quality is the same as the mystical reality
described for ages in every culture. Not just new songs, but lots of
different kinds of art can evoke DQ. It seems too rare an event,
considering the mysterious other have of reality is the evolutionary
force behind the "construction" of static Quality patterns. I believe
the full-blown mystical experiece is a profound evolutionary force in
the life of the indivual who experiences one. Many great leaders and
creators were "born" into greatness this way. But its also with us on an
everyday basis too. I think that's what instinct, intuition and
inspiration are about. I think they are "extra" ways of knowing reality
that go a bit beyond static patterns. And each level must have its own
particular kind of "response" to DQ. Maybe you could say instinct is
biological, intuition is social and inspiration is intellectual? Its
just my sense of the words, perhaps. I have the idea that DQ is always
operating on us, always at work evolving the cosmos.

You're kidding about the stove, right? Getting off of the stove
spontaneously and without thought is a Dynamic movement toward a higher
quality situation. The stove has quality, as you say, when cooking a
steak. The proof of its quality is literally in the pudding. Does it
work? That's the test wether you're talking about stoves or artistic oil
paintings. They're both just Techni, Rht? Even a chair has dharma; is
composed of little moral orders and subatomic particles have limited
choices.

David B.

MOQ Online - http://www.moq.org



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jan 17 2002 - 13:08:44 GMT