[Marsha quotes Pirsig]
"Programs of a political nature are important end
products of social quality that can be effective
only if the underlying structure of social values is right." (ZMM)
[Arlo]
I think its more than just "programs of a
political nature" that are impacted by social
values. In ZMM, Pirsig juxtaposes this thought
with "programs of an economic nature" (in this
case, modes of production, labor).
"To speak of certain government and establishment
institutions as "the system" is to speak
correctly, since these organizations are founded
upon the same structural conceptual relationships
as a motorcycle. They are sustained by structural
relationships even when they have lost all other
meaning and purpose. People arrive at a factory
and perform a totally meaningless task from eight
to five without question because the structure
demands that it be that way. There's no villain,
no "mean guy" who wants them to live meaningless
lives, it's just that the structure, the system
demands it and no one is willing to take on the
formidable task of changing the structure just because it is meaningless.
But to tear down a factory or to revolt against a
government or to avoid repair of a motorcycle
because it is a system is to attack effects
rather than causes; and as long as the attack is
upon effects only, no change is possible. The
true system, the real system, is our present
construction of systematic thought itself,
rationality itself, and if a factory is torn down
but the rationality which produced it is left
standing, then that rationality will simply
produce another factory. If a revolution destroys
a systematic government, but the systematic
patterns of thought that produced that government
are left intact, then those patterns will repeat
themselves in the succeeding government." (ZMM)
He further describes the effect of this, a
general lack of "identity" in labor as follows.
"The creator of it feels no particular sense of
identity with it. The owner of it feels no
particular sense of identity with it. The user of
it feels no particular sense of identity with it.
Hence, by Phædrus' definition, it has no Quality." (ZMM)
He also talks about the other end of labor,
namely "consumption" and how this, too, is
effected by the general SOM pervading ALL forms
of this culture. "Along the streets that lead
away from the apartment he can never see anything
through the concrete and brick and neon but he
knows that buried within it are grotesque,
twisted souls forever trying the manners that
will convince themselves they possess Quality,
learning strange poses of style and glamour
vended by dream magazines and other mass media,
and paid for by the vendors of substance. He
thinks of them at night alone with their
advertised glamorous shoes and stockings and
underclothes off, staring through the sooty
windows at the grotesque shells revealed beyond
them, when the poses weaken and the truth creeps
in, the only truth that exists here, crying to
heaven, God, there is nothing here but dead neon and cement and brick." (ZMM)
Finally, I have to say one thing. I am always a
little taken aback when people here use the
descriptor "artist" as if it should/does refer to
some particular domain of human activity. Isn't
the entire point of Pirsig's Metaphysics that
"Art" is unjustly divorced from its rightful role
in ALL human activity? Isn't the goal here to
stop thinking of "art" as some special form of
human activity and see that ALL forms of human
activity are artful? Don't we just further this
unjust distinction every time we refer to "art" this way?
For example, you asked "Do you think it is the
role of the artist to make culture
uncomfortable?". How is the role of the "artist"
different from the role of the "teacher" or
"craftsman" or "gardener" or "baseball player"?
Isn't the very problem here that teachers,
craftsman, gardeners and baseball players FORGOT
that they, too, are artists? That "art" is the
appearance of Quality revealed in ALL human
activity? ("Art is high-quality endeavor. That is
all that really needs to be said." (ZMM))
In this light, there is no "role of the artist".
There is an intention to our activity, and
whether or not the product of our activity is
Quality (Art) depends on the manner we approach
said activity. If your goal is to convey as
message, perhaps the outcome is "art" or perhaps
it is not. If your goals is a rotisserie, perhaps
the outcome is "art" or it is not. If your goal
is to challenge social norms, perhaps the outcome
is "art" or perhaps it is not. You are not an
"artist" who challenges cultural norms, you
challenge cultural norms and strive to do so
revealing Quality, and if you do then your challenge is "art".
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/
