Hi fellow-focusers, I had voted for this topic, so I feel obliged to post an essay on it. Concerning my studies, which is mechanical-engeneering, I deeply can feel, that there is indeed a split between art and technology. �t is this disappointment, that got me in the first terms of my studies, telling me it is anything else but fun and to see that it consists mostly of dumb copying. " This divorce of art from technology is completely unnatural. It's just that it's gone on so long you have to be an archeologist to find out where the two separated. Rotisserie assembly is actually a long-lost branch of sculpture, so divorced from its roots by centuries of intellectual wrong turns that just to associate the two sounds ludicrous." ZAMM, chapter 14. Seen in the light of MOQ, why are art and technology divorced? What is their role today? Is this divorce definitive? In the world of the ancient greek world, the concept of the word 'techne' included both, the artistic manufacturing on the one hand side and the technical manufacturing on the other hand side. Manufacturing - in this concept is included the word 'manu' - latin for hands. So 'manufacturing' implies the acting on objects with your hands (and your mind). In the case of an creator of artistic sculptures, he is forming (generally speaking) a model of the sculpture, he had in his mind. But manufacturing means also the creation of everyday-applications. In nowadays world, especially in rational, planned and structured industries, the working with your hands, the 'manufacturing' is unfortunately often reduced to the working on an object in which the manufacturer, worker or craftman (although with those it is different) is following mostly given, more or less strict rules, leaving little space to a more creative person. Let me remind you of a famous person,a real universal genius of the middle-ages, Leonardo da Vinci. He is famous for his monumental paintings and drawings, but he has been an great inventor of different kinds of technical appliances as well. He is presumably far more famous for his artistic creations, but consider his inventions almost as equal important. I once came across a small piece of his work during my studies. So about that time, he had lived from 1452 to 1519 (not far from Marcos hometown), allow me that statement, the artistic and the technical field had not yet divided. Surely da Vinci had been an exceptional human being, no doubt, but I dare say he represented the spirit of his age concerning this encompassing way of thinking. But he also had a strong tendency of building up a system of methods, in effort to make further development of technology more easier. One can say, that this is a useful thing to do, because it helps a less ingenious and intuitive persons to take part in the process of development. But in giving rules and methods, you are building up a static system, while in the same moment diminishing the pure intuitive and creative part of human mind, i.e. diminishing dynamic quality. So in retrospective of the past centurys, since Leonardo da Vinci (there may be others as well), there had been an rapid increasing of the static system, the methodical working on the field of technology. As long as a person is applying these methods freely, being aware of the fact that invention, in general, comprises also the 'New', he never gets in danger of considering theses rules and methods as all there is. You never (or seldom) can force an invention to come to life by means of methods. We have to be aware of the fact, that we have to look for people, who carry out inventions and the development of technology. What I was describing above is merely a theoretical consideration of that context. Let us assume, concerning this context, that there are two kinds of people (roughly speaking). The one kind of people are the ones, acting more effectively under non-ruled/non-structured circumstances. They work fine, when there is the metaphorical 'white sheet of paper'. The other kind is far less being able to work intuitively, keep sticking to the static system - to the methods, the rules - which is called in my studies 'methods of construction' In the MoQ way you may feel, just like me, a slight paradox feeling about this term. Construction implies always invention. Binding 'construction' to 'method', comes to me a bit like rapture. Comparing those two different kinds of people, what can we say about them? Just to give them names, I will call the first group the 'inventors' and the second one the 'technocratics'. Both of them construct machines and technical appliances, but the way they do is much different. The 'inventor' is described in uncounted novels, comics etc. (the one from Walt Disneys Donald Duck) as well, as he could be found in the history of the technical development always in moments, when it is said: 'XY invented machine Z'. Indeed,many of them invented a large number of machines on their own (Thomas A.Edison, Carl Benz, James Watt, etc.). In the opinion of the majority of the people, those are the 'good guys'. The 'technocratics' are making inventions as well, but they do it by following a more strict, rational way. Seldom there is a person mentioned by name, who has been involved in the development of a new construction. They work in big companys and are being paid for what they do. Sometimes they even dislike the way they do their work, too. We have to imagine these companys with all their staff, their rules and all those instruments of measurement, as Pirsigs slow, but nevertheless effective machinery, but this is somehow not the nicest way to do it. What makes technology so ugly is the fact, that the 'technocratics' are dominating our world. A free mind to be, is the longing of many of us; a free mind is willing to let dynamic quality flow in and is feeling supressed and ruled, when forced to do his work in an overwhelming static way. Alas, I believe, you can't turn back the clock. No one can, nor wish to be back at times, when inventioms or technical ideas has been the field of a few weird inventors, where there is 'chance' the reason for technical achievement. Greetings, and may DQ be with you JoVo PS.: It is a pity, that I'm late again, because I'm rather interested what you think about my ideas. Furthermore I would have liked to comment on some of your posts; It has been a great discussion. Sorry for my orthography, but time is short now, so I had no time left to read it over. I hope I can make it in time. MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
