LS Re: over-ripe
Diana, Thanks for the info Diana. A little slow responding as I've been out and about rather than sat at my PC. Glad to see that it made it on to the list. Prejudice is a funny thing. As I read this post I felt angry as it was clearly nonsense yet I'd hardly started reading it. Why should I feel angry, somebody had simply forwarded this for my interest? Little alarm bells start ringing. This probably means that I dislike the suggestion as it attacks the fairly comfortable white-middleclass-male lifestyle I inhabit and my mind is trying not to think about this but simply drum up a few rationalisations. This doesn't mean the points are true simply that they may be inconvenient for me. It's true that 'It's completely unfair to express disgust at her' for natural ageing yet fairness is an intellectual reaction whilst this disgust is a low-level biological reaction. Biology isn't fair. Sometimes the most terrible thoughts and feelings go through our minds, things that our intellects rebel against. I'm not a Freudian but I don't think that pretending that these things don't happen is the way to go; if I don't acknowledge what goes on inside of me how can I select actions and words are appropriate to use? An interesting point is that his intellect seemed revolted by Lila yet he still felt sexual attraction. This conflict of biology and intellect over the matter of sex is hardly new but does fit with Pirsig's later levels of MOQ. The suggestion of institutionalized sexism brings in a social level too. that with in a single person can be conflicts of biological, social and intellectual levels. The book operates on the social level as well as the intellectual level so the social context in which the book is written shouldn't be ignored. The answer to Pirsig's apparent sexism? Possibly he simply didn't 'see' it in the same way I didn't see it when I read it. We humans like to think that we are rational yet I know that I act as much on social conventions, selfish biology or plain old stupidity and ignorance as on careful reasoning. That isn't a good excuse I know but it could be the truth (The idea of Pirsig's acting irrationally goes against the 'godhood principle' of slow reading, I'll take the flaming as read!). David, I agree with your comments on the opening sentence and following discussion on that. This was what I was trying to say only better put. In the true definition of slow-reading the sexism issue is off-topic as it clearly isn't part of the author's intent to discuss this. Still the author can inadvertently raise issues that are of interest and bear discussion. If the group is to be open to newbies, of which I am one, then some latitude is needed. I don't envy Keith's job in deciding what to let through! Probably 'techno-cyber math geeks' makes a pretty good description for me. I'll give the thing another listen. Jonathan, Pretty good summary of the state of play in your post. 'So instead of voting to move on, let's "vote" by not posting. Let's say that we give each Chapter a minimum of 2 weeks and then extend it until the posts dry up e.g. for 3 days.' Sounds reasonable, I'm sure that Keith's commonsence will dictate when is a good time to prod people into the next chapter. Lee MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
LS Re: over-ripe
LS, Lee wrote: >I hadn't thought about the sexist thing. I suppose as a computer nerd I >need someone to hit me over the head with the point before I see it. I recall Mary Whittler had problems with that passage, I also recall David Thomas and Anthony McWatt relating tales of women they had given LILA to who had found it distasteful. I can't recall precisely what the reasons were but my guess would be that they are a. the objectification of Lila as a sexual object, and/or b. the implication that Lila's body is disgusting because of her age. You could say, well that's what happened and her breasts did feel that, Phaedrus was just telling it like it was. But there's a certain revulsion in the way he says it. Lila is, 40+ years old (?), of course her body is not as firm as a 20-year-old, but does that make her ugly, does that make her disgusting? Lila is no longer reproductively useful, so she has "gone off". The implication of that is that women are only "useful" for reproduction. But actually there is nothing wrong with Lila's body, she's going through the normal process of aging that's all. It's completely unfair to express disgust at her. Plus, it's only Lila that is stipped and humiliated. We hear that Phaedrus has a big nose and poor posture, but we don't see Lila squirming at his shrivelled up old penis, though one would imagine she certainly would. Why are her sexual organs brought out for ridicule and his aren't? Of course people who don't read feminist literature would miss that point because we're all so used to seeing women treated as objects and men as subjects, it seems perfectly logical. Obviously it's not entirely Pirsig's fault, but this book has been published in a society which obsessively abuses women by evaluating them purely on the basis of their looks. Sure you can say that the book just isn't about that and Pirsig never intended to be offensive, but his work does not exist in a vacuum -- it's a book about a woman published in a society that degrades women, and there on page two, his leading character, a character based on himself, does exactly that. So as far as I know that's the explanation. Yes, I'm reading into it, and slanting it to fit a point of view, but you wanted the accusations of sexism in chap 1 explained and seeing as the people who made the accusations are not here (or not participating) I guess I have to be the one to do it. It's most refreshing that you ask what the argument is before dismissing it. There may be hope for you. I shall have to save my opinions on the matter for another day. Diana MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
