Re: MD Lila's Child

From: Platt Holden (
Date: Fri Aug 08 2003 - 22:12:15 BST

  • Next message: "Re: MD Lila's Child"

    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


    MOQ.ORG -
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 -
    Nov '02 Onward -
    MD Queries -

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Aug 08 2003 - 22:10:53 BST