John, John, John, I do not think art, or my painting, is intellectual. No. No. No.
Every time the subject of art comes up I wonder is there something I can say. But, no, there is no-thing for me to say. I moved to this island to paint as meditation. On May 29, 2010, at 12:07 AM, John Carl wrote: > Marsha, Marsha Marsha: > > >>> Marsha to Arlo: >> >> My fundamental >> point is that the fourth level consists of intellectual static patterns of >> value as >> reified concepts and the rules for their rational manipulation. >> Intellectual >> patterns create false boundaries, giving the illusion of independence, or >> 'thingness'. The fourth level is a formalized subject/object (SOM) level >> where the subjective is supposedly stripped from the experience. >> >> >> > What about Art? What about Music? What about dancing and dreaming and all > the human things we do and think and feel that are not rational, are not > intellectual at all, but make up the best part of who we are and who we want > to be? Maybe art is love and outside categorization. > What about painting, Marsha? I don't know about painting. I love to paint, and paint to love. (Remove the pronouns please.) > What about a painting my daughter did, which still hangs in the door of my > bedroom, and speaks to me of so much, so much important and wondrous things > that have nothing to do with words or division or any of that intellectual > defining that comes in and tries to capture the spirit of what is real in > its wordy definitioning? > > What about that Marsha? Sounds like Quality as Love. > It's not your fault. The fourth level should never have been labeled "the > intellectual" as if that certain system of knowing, that smug objectivism > that was thoroughly thrashed in ZAMM comes roaring back as the apex of all > being, top dog of the hierarchical pile. Hmmmm. Once you see the intellectual level as patterns, it all changes, doesn't it? I love intellectual patterns. Do you think I would be struggling to participate in this list if I didn't think the process was incredibly beautiful, and full of love? Hierarchical from an evolutionary perspective and as a movement towards freedom. Works for me! Works just fine... To my mind the tragedy is being stuck thinking, often unconsciously, 'subject-and-objects' is the way things are in reality. Another reason I agree with Bo. There is a point-of-view higher than than the intellectual level (Q-level sounds alright.) where the conflict melts away. > > balderdash. Bad labeling is all. The 4th level is not "intellectual" its > "aesthetic". Aesthetics is a reified concept!!! It is very much a product of a s/o reality transforming experience into an objectified thing-in-itself. Experiencing beauty, love and joy is unbounded and the word is not the experience. > And it's certainly NOT SOM. What a travesty that would be. Knock it off > immediately. Well, for me, the fourth level is SOM, but it is not ugly. It is beautiful when seen rightly. Where RMP translates the Taoist poem into 'kill intellectual patterns', I think what he is saying is that unpatterned experience requires dropping all thought especially those intellectual patterns wanting to experience unpatterned experience. Does that make sense? > > Lovingly all the same, > > John Art seems impossible to talk about. Whatever it is, for me it is not this, not that. That is for painting as much as fixing motorcycles, I would think, or preparing a cup of tea. Yes? Bye cherry pie. Marsha ___ 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
