Re: MD Hi

From: Peter Lennox (
Date: Fri May 18 2001 - 13:22:51 BST

There's a passage that pertains to this in V.S. Ramachandran's "Phantoms in
the Brain", which is basically a very readable 'neurology made popular'
book, along the lines of Oliver Sachs' "Man who Mistook his Wife for a Hat";
anyway, I'll try to find the pagination when I get chance.
What Ramachandran proposes is that many activities do not need, nor normally
utilise the 'conciousness circuits' (which he specifies), and further that
engaging conciousness may result in impedance with respect to these tasks.
He cites pool (I think) and archery as examples.
I've a feeling that there's another David ("Trickster"?) on this list that
is involved in Drama; improvisational techniques have been very useful
there, and the main thrust is "don't think about it, just do it"
I would also recommend Iain Johnstone's " Impro - improvisation and
theatre", not because of what he says about theatre, but what he says about
creativity, imagination, and so on. Don't know if it's still in print,

On the subject of names, aren't those names (Horse and Elephant) given to
substances whose main purpose is to help people 'get out of their heads'? -
doesn't sound a bad description of one application of philosophy.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrea Sosio" <>
To: <>
Sent: 18 May 2001 10:00
Subject: Re: MD Hi

> I have been playing in a small band for some years too. We weren't that
good as
> far as musical technique goes, and someday it occured to us that we could
> play random and record. It is *amazing* what comes out of it. Definitely
we made
> some music that we could never be able to do intellectually (i.e.,
> The most incredible thing is that melodic structures do emerge that are
> beyond your technical ability to compose/play. I think great musicians are
> good that they can do deliberately what an ordinary person does "per
chance" and
> thus, when they enter *their* (half-?)unconscious, it produces art at a
> higher quality level.
> Great music/art seems to be the one you can't really define/describe. That
> new each time, because you could never manage to have the *whole* picture
of it
> in your head, and say, "the artist wanted to do so and so". There's always
> something left out. Always new facets, etc. I think this topic is *really*
> relevant for MOQ. Either an issue of levels' interplay or of
> interplay...
> AS
> ha scritto:
> > in response to dave's statement about dq being exhibited through music,
> > the case of hendrix and others, i think that it is very true. i play
> > and write my own music and all, and sometimes when i play, i stop paying
> > attention to what im playing, and random notes come out that sound
> > on the tape recorder. the thing i dont understand is how my fingers go
> > they do without me willing them to do so. or am i really willing them
at a
> > sub-conscious level that i can't detect. in any case, i know that there
is a
> > definite dq presence there, but im not sure exactly how or why.. any
> > edification on this would be appreciated.
> >
> > MOQ.ORG -
> > Mail Archive -
> > MD Queries -
> >
> > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> >
> --
> Andrea Sosio
> Tel. (8)9006
> mailto:
> Mail Archive -
> MD Queries -
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

Mail Archive -
MD Queries -

To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:16 BST