Zen
I'm trying to read "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" again, after a gap of thirty years of so, and just like the last time, I'm finding it hard going after the first hundred pages. The philosophy I can cope with, but the story telling is turgid and difficult with flashbacks to the author's madness interlaced with the events of his present.
However it's the philosophy that I came for, and that doesn't disappoint. I hadn't realised how much the book has influenced my life and the ways in which I think or act. The core principle which I have extracted from the book is a reinforcement of the Platonic "Good", doing things right, and being in the correct frame of mind to perform them. In presenting the dichotomy between the Classical and Romantic viewpoints upon the world, Pirsig shows how the '60's counterculture started to reject the objective, scientific, verifiable outlook upon the world in favour of one more focussed upon appearances. In that, he forshadowed the current obsession with "designer" goods by more than twenty years.
Nowadays, discussions around good design tend to be centred upon appearance, looks. Designer clothes may have a marketable name and an expensive pricetag, but are frequently made just as shoddily as supermarket specials, and will fall apart just as easily. To take another contemporary example, Apple electronic goods look beautiful and are simplicity itself to operate, yet they have a reputation for unreliability. Pirsig looked beyond appearances to the heart of the matter, whether that matter be people, machinery or scientific method.
It was his attitude to machinery that affected me most of all. Perhaps it's laziness, but i have adopted an attitude that function is the essence of manufactured good, and that if it works, if it's in tolerance and maintainable; appearances don't matter. So my bicycles tend to have components that colour-clash with others, or have effective workarounds to problems which enhance function at the expense of looks. Yet there is no laziness in the way in which I like to see machinery function properly, with (for example) chain-lines true, spoke tension sounding correct, oil-levels where they should be. This spills over into clothing, as well. My favourite trousers are ex-German Army camouflage combat trousers. Nothing fits as well, nothing else has the reinforced pockets which mean I can carry everything I want to. Yet (according to Moonface) they look scruffy, and they certainly aren't suitable for business. But compare their quality of manufacture with some (expensive) "designer" trousers I once bought. The combats have better finish, more belt-loops, better detailing around the pockets. But they don't have a smart label. We are being bamboozled into looking at outward appearance rather than assessing what really works.
Wherein lies the quality?
:o)
However it's the philosophy that I came for, and that doesn't disappoint. I hadn't realised how much the book has influenced my life and the ways in which I think or act. The core principle which I have extracted from the book is a reinforcement of the Platonic "Good", doing things right, and being in the correct frame of mind to perform them. In presenting the dichotomy between the Classical and Romantic viewpoints upon the world, Pirsig shows how the '60's counterculture started to reject the objective, scientific, verifiable outlook upon the world in favour of one more focussed upon appearances. In that, he forshadowed the current obsession with "designer" goods by more than twenty years.
Nowadays, discussions around good design tend to be centred upon appearance, looks. Designer clothes may have a marketable name and an expensive pricetag, but are frequently made just as shoddily as supermarket specials, and will fall apart just as easily. To take another contemporary example, Apple electronic goods look beautiful and are simplicity itself to operate, yet they have a reputation for unreliability. Pirsig looked beyond appearances to the heart of the matter, whether that matter be people, machinery or scientific method.
It was his attitude to machinery that affected me most of all. Perhaps it's laziness, but i have adopted an attitude that function is the essence of manufactured good, and that if it works, if it's in tolerance and maintainable; appearances don't matter. So my bicycles tend to have components that colour-clash with others, or have effective workarounds to problems which enhance function at the expense of looks. Yet there is no laziness in the way in which I like to see machinery function properly, with (for example) chain-lines true, spoke tension sounding correct, oil-levels where they should be. This spills over into clothing, as well. My favourite trousers are ex-German Army camouflage combat trousers. Nothing fits as well, nothing else has the reinforced pockets which mean I can carry everything I want to. Yet (according to Moonface) they look scruffy, and they certainly aren't suitable for business. But compare their quality of manufacture with some (expensive) "designer" trousers I once bought. The combats have better finish, more belt-loops, better detailing around the pockets. But they don't have a smart label. We are being bamboozled into looking at outward appearance rather than assessing what really works.
Wherein lies the quality?
:o)
posted by Moses at
7:23 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home