Dear Dan,
maybe some criticism will help you in your work on Lila's Child.
So,... here I go
I read LC in the beginning of this year, on a three months holiday through
Asia. Quite difficult to get into... but, well you can't look at sunsets
forever...
When I first read LC was being published I was quite surprised.
Allthough the content is very interesting, I think the form in which it is
written down isn't. In my opinion, although you've done a great job, it's
not quite ready for printing.
I have to go along with Diana for a big part.
But I also disagree.
The good part of LC in my opinion is that it can be the Static Intellectual
Pattern, like Pirsig wrote.
Yes, LC is quite dull, as are most intellectual Scientific Books. It doesn't
matter.
Even Jimi Hendrix would not be able to explain E=MC2 well and also make it
artistically Dynamic. Different kind of qualities, you know.
I think the big thing is not to present it as the third book on MOQ, but as
a backup of the other two. An effort in understanding the MOQ.
I surely would get rid of this email-form.
Get rid of all the names, (make notes for yourself so you can give credit to
whom it deserves) and compile the text just according to its content....)
I hope this all helps,
Marc
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
