All:

In Chapter 22 of Lila, Pirsig laments the lack of quality in modern life:

"In the time that Phaedrus grew up, intellect was dominant over 
society, but the results of the new social looseness weren't turning out as 
predicted. Something was wrong. The world was no doubt in better 
shape intellectually and technologically but despite that, somehow, the 
"quality" of it was not good. There was no way you could say why this 
quality was no good. You just felt it." 

An essay by Roger Scruton entitled "Beauty and Desecration" 
explains as well as anything I've read "why this quality was no good." 
The following excerpt suggests where to look for the answer:

"But why is beauty a value? It is an ancient view that truth, goodness 
and beauty cannot, in the end, conflict. Maybe the degeneration of 
beauty into kitsch comes precisely from the postmodern loss of 
truthfulness, and with it the loss of moral direction. That is the message 
of such early modernists as Eliot, Barber and Stevens, and it is a 
message we need to listen to."

Scruton traces the change in art from a goal of attaining beauty "as a 
way in which lasting moral and spiritual values acquire sensuous form" 
to art that aimed to "disturb, subvert, or transgress moral certainties."

Scruton concludes, "We should take a lesson from this kind of 
(artistic) desecration: in attempting to show our human ideals are 
worthless, it shows itself to be worthless. And when something shows 
itself to be worthless, it is time to throw it way."

Seems to me that is also a message from the MOQ.

For Scruton's essay, please go to:

http://www.city-journal.org/2009/19_2_beauty.html

Regards,
Platt

 







Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Reply via email to