> > > Dan: > I understand. Something of substance stands on its own. I have to say > I was a bit shocked that in one of his posts John referred to American > Idol in regards to my writings, as if I'm trying to one-up everyone. >
Nah that doesn't ring any bells with me Dan. I haven't ever felt anything but delight in your writings, ever since the one about the whales. Probably my fault. I can be too obscure sometimes, wrapped up in the stories in my own head and too damn lazy to translate properly. > No, no, no. Good writing isn't about gaining personal approval. It's > about bettering oneself. Man, and I thought I was an existentialist. Your statement doesn't quite scan there. If it isn't about gaining approval, then why take umbrage when you assume (wrongly even) that it doesn't? > It's about prolonged and careful engagement, > learning the language, building a vocabulary, reading, reading, > reading and then reading some more. And then letting all that go and > just writing. Once I get a first draft down I can always go back and > dress it up for the party. The only person I'm trying to better is > myself. The only person I can improve is myself, but I don't see anything wrong with trying to improve the discourse I've joined. Even though I fail, it's a worthy enough hobby. > > Dan said: > > > > As an example, John's fixation with Royce... it may well be a Dynamic > insight that James and Royce were best buddies. I did not know that. But > don't shove Royce quotes down my throat day after day. Talk about dry and > irrelevant. Make it interesting. Build a case. Don't put me to sleep. > Mebbe a little soft shoe and song? Come to think of it, now this is starting to sound like American Idol. I brought Royce up originally to see if anybody was interested. There was more than one person on this list who did express interest, including dmb who once complained that I wasn't discussing him enough. When interest flagged, I quit. > Dan: > Could well be. And again, that's incumbent on John to build a case as > to why such a pursuit isn't a wild goose chase. I don't have homework > per se but I do have priorities that simply don't allow me to delve > into something as obscure as Royce simply because someone copies and > pastes quote after quote. > > I wish. Most everything I've posted on Royce I had to type out by hand from a book kept open with an elbow or heavy object, and I did so because I found things I thought would be interesting to others of this list. I guess I was wrong. But I was certainly sincere. I didn't have to scrawl in my own blood, but I did have to do a lot of typing. Calling it all cut and paste is unfair. Dan: > The introduction of theism into the discussion group is distasteful to > me as well. There's this holier-than-thou attitude that we're all > familiar with, and worse, the incessant need to convert others to > their way of thinking. The only possible way anyone could construe me pushing theism is the fact that I've argued against atheism. I don't see how Pirsig's MoQ could be atheistic in the normal sense of the word because the normal sense of the word denies any source of values. But do I get dialogue? Engagement? Argumentative disputation? Nay, those would take thought and effort and who has the time these days what with everybody's busy schedule and all. Just dogmatic reaction without thought, and since that reaction is accusing me of the very dogmatism that I'm fighting against, I see no hope for effective dialogue. Whooossh. Hear that sound Dan? That's the sound of John's gumption leaking out through the hole your unfair characterization poked in me. Au revoir, JCP 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/md/archives.html
