From: Platt Holden (pholden@sc.rr.com)
Date: Fri Aug 08 2003 - 22:12:15 BST
Hi Squonk, Paul, All:
> squonk: I see your point. However, a teacher must be creative in his/her
> communication in order to convey enthusiasm and delight in the topic.
> All the best teachers i ever had the luck to be taught by would quite
> happily fly off the main thread and introduce all sorts of apparently
> unrelated stuff, only to have it all tie together at the end. It's a
> real pleasure to see it in action - as it was spontaneous and free
> flowing. This is important Platt, as i feel sure you can appreciate -
> for it would appear that the whole was somehow 'felt' and structured by
> the teacher before delivery. This is like the artist who intuits the
> whole before execution. I can't explain it, but it's Dynamic. Peter
> Cook, the British satirist and comedian could do this very well
> apparently - Cook could just begin a long story from scratch and quip
> for minutes on end before tying everything together in a delightfully
> funny punch line. I feel the relationship between the static repertoire
> and DQ is a key.
I know what you mean, Squonk, and I appreciate very much your giving us
examples so your meaning becomes even clearer. I too have had a teacher
or two in my dim past who could, on the fly, fill a classroom with
wonder and awe by her ability to tie together a whole bunch of
disparate ideas into a symphony of new understanding. A rare performing
artist, for sure. But, I'm still stuck on this coming out of the
intellectual level which I see as been filled mostly, as Pirsig says,
with static ideas. I also want to remind you that some artists take the
opposite course in the act of creation of the one you describe as
intuiting the whole before execution. Many painters, jazz musicians and
improv comedians do the opposite. The build on what they see or hear
happening, intuiting as they go along.
What I'm trying to describe is the creative PROCESS and to me the
intellectual LEVEL doesn't contain the catalyst, the energy if you
will, that's needed to create new harmonies. Sure, intellect is related
to DQ as are all the levels, but only secondarily. As Pirsig put it:
"In the MOQ Quality comes first which produces ideas which produce what
we know has matter." (Note 67, Lila's Child) To me, intellect is the
"home" for static intellectual patterns or "repertoire." To put it in
musical terms, the intellectual level contains the notes, the chords,
the tempos, the keys, the progressions and all the other musical
paraphernalia which an experiencing human being, responding to DQ,
combines into a creative composition. But the actual act of combining
is beyond the intellectual level. It's ahead of all levels. It's at the
front of the train. It's more a part of pure experiencing than
intellectualizing if you know what I mean. It's in the realm of
aesthetics, wherever that is.
Maybe I'm being too picky, Squonk. But you, I, Paul and I'm sure others
are circling around the flame that's at the heart of the MOQ. I've been
convinced for a long time that the fuel for that flame emanates from
the realm of beauty and that DQ is the spark that lights it for us.
But, like everyone else who attempts it, I find it terribly hard to
pattern it intellectually, i.e., to put it into words. I need all the
help I can get and appreciate those who feel as I do more than I can
say.
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 : Fri Aug 08 2003 - 22:10:53 BST