David and foci,
You've certainly made a good argument that mysticism is important to Pirsig but
my response was directed at the more pointed question of whether the peyote
ceremony revealed the MOQ to him. I'm a little sorry that I answered the
question now because I don't want this topic to take over the discussion, but at
the same time I don't want you to feel like I'm slighting you by not answering.
It seems you are zeroing in on a thesis you wish to carry out month after month
until we finish slow reading the book. I can tell you are very enthusiastic
about it but I think it would be better served in the normal monthly format.
Personally, I'm not a big fan of mysticism, so having you point it out as being
central over and over, month after month, would be like enduring chinese water
torture. But I guess that would be my problem.
Regards,
Glennn
David Buchanan wrote:
> Glenn, Marco, Diana and Y'all:
>
> I think Pirsig put the teepee scene at the front of the book because of its
> importance! If we disagree on this matter now, in the first three chapters,
> then we always will. I'll show that these same issues are carried all the
> way through the book, even to the last pages of Lila.
>
> I'm a little concerned about your efforts to dismiss, ignore or otherwise
> explain away Pirsig's mysticism? We're supposed to be focused on the book's
> meaning and intent. We're supposed to be sticking close to the text and
> really listening to the author. Haven't you noticed how many quotes I've
> included in the posts this month? Were is your supporting material? If your
> reasons for dismissing mysticism are based on Lila, you're not showing it,
> and I certainly don't see it.
>
> MAKING A CASE BASED ON THE TEXT
> You've forced to break the rules. On page 408, fourth paragraph from the END
> of Lila, Pirsig says,....
>
> "Phaedrus remembered saying to Dusenberry just after that peyote meeting was
> over, "The Hindu understanding is just a low-grade imitation of THIS! This
> is how it must have really been before all the clap trap got started."
>
> I think this is pretty clear evidence that he never abandons mysticism. Its
> right there at the very end. And just a chapter of two before that, he says
> flatly that mysticism and DQ are indentified with one another within his
> MOQ. On page 373 Pirsig writes,
>
> "The Metaphysics of Quality identifies religious mysticism with Dynamic
> Quality."
>
> Or how about this one, from page 377...
>
> "He thought about how once this integration occurs and DQ is identified with
> religious mysticism it produces an avalanche of information as to what DQ
> is."
>
> I'm truly puzzled by the apparent invisibility of these quotes. (And the
> apparent non-existence of the quotes from the first three chapters included
> in previous posts.) Do they not appear in your e-mail? Are they included
> only in my copy of Lila? Does anyone else see Pirsig putting mysticism at
> the center of the MOQ, or is it just me? But seriously,...
>
> I realize that I'm not making any friends here, but seems as though I'm
> taking the evidence directly from Pirsig, putting right in front of your
> eyes, and you just refuse to see it. Its like you're reading a different
> book. Or tripping. It just kills me.
>
> Frustrated and lonely, DMB
>
> MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:20 BST