[MD] Romantic/Classic knowledge vs quality

[MarshaV]

At 04:13 AM 1/26/2009, you wrote:
>Hello
>
>In Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, Pirsig spends a lot of
>time discussing romantic and classic knowledge/intelligence. Im not
>sure how Id summarize his main message on them though: that both are
>equally good, and when one (or peoples) neglects one and emphasises
>the other too much, its a bad thing. One should pursue both (equally).
>What was it that the people in the traffic jam (with the empty
>expressions) were lacking: not enough romantic knowledge, and too much
>classic?
>
>Am I missing something?
>
>Im even more uncertain how he relates Romantic/Classic knowledge to
>the idea of "quality" that he develops. Is he saying that romantic
>intelligence/knowledge is that which first recognises quality (or was
>that some other "sense"). And somewhat later the classic knowledge can
>be used to develop/apply this quality? If I recall correctly, in the
>railroad analogy, the railway tracks were quality, the cutting edge of
>the train was romantic knowledge (?) and the rest of the train was
>classic knowledge?
>
>
>Id be very grateful for any clarifications.
>
>Best Wishes,
>Declan
>
>

Greetings Declan,

My interpretation is that the Romantic is flowing with the Code of 
Art (process & DQ).  Classical would be on the Intellectual Level, 
which could also be on the cutting edge of DQ (Intellect & DQ).  But 
this is my very humble interpretation.


Marsha



> 
>

.
.
Science does not know its debt to imagination.  ~Ralph Waldo Emerson
.
.