From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Sun Feb 15 2004 - 23:46:54 GMT
What I have to ask from your last post is that, when Mozart is determined
static, but then becomes a "different kind of" static because of a meshing of
Mozart and coherent relationships - it is STILL static. Is this a layman's way of
looking at it or should I be seeing something else?
Mark: Mozart is dead and that is pretty static? ;) But his work still has
that capacity to live in new relationships: At that very moment when your
patterns engage with those left by Mozart, DQ has the potential to create new
coherent patterns.
The principle of creative harmony - the Tao - Quality - SQ-SQ coherence - the
way, is what i wish to convey to you. Actually, you seem to me to be very
close to it - you live in your music and feel what i wish to convey to you - a
sense of suspension; a timeless coherence which you lose when you think about it
too much? But as it happens....
Also, do you (or anyone) feel that there are song(s) in existence that
will never lose their dynamic quality? For example, Led Zeppelin's "Kasmir" has
never lost anything for me and I have listened to that song for years and know
when I am ready to die I will still listen to that song. Again, this maybe my
own dynamic thinking but isn't there others that feel this way? Is that
possible?
Dan
Mark: If you hammered Kasmir in your life then maybe you could kill it stone
dead? You raise an interesting question, but i feel the answer may be no - any
pattern can be experienced to the point of killing the best relationship
between your patterns and those of the music.
Mark.
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 : Sun Feb 15 2004 - 23:48:28 GMT