Hi John, PzEph, Roger, Marco, Bo and All:
In response to PzEph's post on mysticism, John Lawton wrote:
I really enjoy this turn in the tide. I'm reminded of Martin
Heidegger's "turn" wherein he became much more poetic in his
language and thought. Herein is a clue I think. The usual
discursive grasping of thought finds greater freedom and accuracy
in the ambiguity (from a standard perspective) and richness of
poetry. I'm more inclined to find greater depth and comprehension
in the poet rather than the philosopher. Let's not forget, Pirsig
wrote a novel not a philosophical treatise. In the language of
poetry opposites are often unified, neat boudaries transgressed,
ignored, obliterated and transcendance and immanence enjoy a
mutual collusion. The riddle of language reaching for "Reality" or
mapping it is untied in the great poems IMO.
John
Thanks for your comment, John. What you say points to a level of
understanding above and beyond intellect�in Pirsig�s words, �a
code of art.� You�ve captured that level�s essence in a few
words�a level where �opposites are often unified, boundaries
transgressed, ignored, obliterated and transcendence and
immanence enjoy a mutual collusion.� Nicely put. Those who have
had memorable aesthetic experiences will immediately recognize
your description of what occurs.
Looking forward to more contributions from you on the subject of
art and its place in the MOQ scheme of things.
Platt
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
