From: InfoPro Consulting: Mark Heyman (markheyman@infoproconsulting.com)
Date: Sun May 09 2004 - 22:43:45 BST
Sorry, David. This one slipped by me somehow.
On 8 May 2004 at 14:43, David Buchanan wrote:
"But one day in the classroom the professor of philosophy was
blithely expounding on the illusory nature of the world for
what seemed the fiftieth time and Phaedrus raised his hand and asked
coldly if it was believed that the atomic bombs that had
dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were illusory. The professor
smiled and said yes. That was the end of the exchange."
(ZMM-PB, Page 126)
dmb said:
This is one of my favorite "scenes" in ZAMM. It's so very cinematic,
don't you think? Blithely expounding and coldly asking. If I were the
director Imight even intercut a couple of mushroom clouds and the
burning flesh of Japanese women and children just before the
professor says "yes".
msh says
Hey, sounds great! Why don't you make it? It's a shame that a movie
version of ZMM never quite came around, even if, as Redford says in
Lila, Pirsig wouldn't like it. If even only a few of the ideas came
across cinematically, that would be something. And a more people
would be exposed to them.
:
dmb said:
As I read it, young Phaedrus is giving up because he's disgusted by
the professor's lack of moral outrage.
msh says:
Sure that's part of it. But if you read on he says something like,
Well that sort of philosophy is fine for some people, people who
don't read books and newspapers, and have little to do with the daily
world. But for anyone who cares about massive human suffering, it's
woefully inadequate... I don't have the book in front of me. so
can't quote exactly, sorry. The point is, he's rejecting the
philosophy, bath water and baby both.
dmb says:
On another note, it seems to me that Pirsig would certainly endorse
the efforts of the Democracies to defeat fascism during WW2, I don't
think he's endorsing or defending the bombing of Nagasaki or
Hiroshima. Quite the opposite. One can support the cause and deplore
the tactics without contradiction.
msh says:
Yes. I agree. Of all wars I've studied, WWII comes closest to
having a solid moral justification. But there were lots of things
happening in the ten years or so prior to Pearl Harbor, tremendous
economic pressure on Japan via oil embargos, for example, that fueled
the runup to the attack, which didn't just come out of the blue.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the terrible brutality and
aggression of the Japanese forces; I'm just saying it wasn't like
"Wow! Now why'd they go and attack us! (palm slap to forehead).
We're just sitting here minding our own business!"
Also, American business was closely linked to German business during
this period, you know, guys like Henry Ford and Hitler and their
mutual admiration society. It's not like no one knew about the
extermination camps till 1941, for heaven sakes. And even then,
Germany declared war on the US, first. So, my point is, start
checking your DQ if someone tells you you're going to war for human
rights.
Best,
Mark Heyman
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 May 09 2004 - 22:49:18 BST