[MD] A fly in the MOQ ointment

[MarshaV]

Hello Mary,

I'm enjoying your posts.

I don't see an answers to my questions.  Are you sure you want to place "ART", 
without a definition, in the Intellectual Level?  Is it a special case?  Or are you
attempting to use the label 'ART' as a generalized, abstract symbol to be reified, 
studied and manipulated?  Or maybe RMP didn't place it in any particular 
level, because it defies categorization?   


Marsha   




On Apr 4, 2010, at 4:39 PM, Mary wrote:

> Hi Marsha,
> 
> If Dynamic Quality is the pre-intellectual cutting edge of reality, where do
> we put art we've seen before?  Where does old, tired art go?  It was great
> the first 10 times, but what do we do with it when it becomes static?  Is it
> even still "art"? 
> 
> The Inorganic recycle bin?
> 
> Seriously, I could agree with some discomfort that art could be Social or
> Intellectual.  Kind of depends on the point of the art, right?  In the case
> of something like an old religious icon, that's clearly meant to be
> representational of a religious concept, so Social Level for sure on that,
> but what about a million other kinds of art?  Where do they go?
> 
> Arlo, I think, recently said something about how no new movies ever need to
> be made after Titanic since it was the best movie he'd ever seen.  But after
> you've seen it a bunch it becomes static.  I think he was making just that
> point about Dynamic Quality.  But, according to Pirsig, everything is either
> Static or Dynamic, and if it's Static, it's supposed to fit into one of the
> 4 levels.  Whatever do we do?
> 
> Mary
> 
>> 
>> Do you have a particular definition for ART that puts it into
>> the Intellectual Level, or does all art all through the ages
>> fall into that level?
>> 
>> 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


 
___