Martin Striz (striz@zeus.ezwv.com)
Thu, 5 Feb 1998 06:07:42 +0100
Diana wrote:
>I think that Lila is essentially a classical book and so it attracts
>classically minded people. Being on the Internet probably contributes to
>that but I'm sure it would be the case offline as well. We have had a
>few romantics wandering through but they seem to be annoyed by attempts
>to structure and define the MoQ. They also tend to be the people who
>prefered ZMM to Lila. I find it hard to see why anyone romantic would
>like Lila. If you take away the stuff about hierarchies, codes, morals
>and relationships, then all you've got is a story about a guy and a
>boat.
Good observation. Pirsig admitted to being on the classical side (he
studied biochemistry originally), and this probably gave him an
incessant
need to find out "What is Quality? What the hell is it?" The
romanticist
would have just left it alone; the zen master would have said you're
thinking too much. But I think the point of the whole thing is the
INTEGRATION of the two. Where would we be if no one had bothered to
analyze Quality? Rationalism is just as important as empiricism, but
not
more.
Martin Striz
striz@ezwv.com
"And what is good...and what is not good,
need we ask anyone to tell us these things?"
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:46 CEST