Knowing technology well enough to be able to repair it is a lost art, writes Patricia Maunder.
'WE NEED a return to individual integrity, self-reliance and old-fashioned gumption," wrote Robert Pirsig in 1974's Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. This seminal book is ostensibly about a motorcycle road trip but the narrative is primarily a framework for his philosophical reflections, centering on the view that modern "man is separated from what he does".
Pirsig's prime example is the road-tripper who intentionally remained ignorant of how to maintain or repair his motorcycle, then became angry if it broke down.
When Zen was published, society had, according to its author, become divided into Romantics (creative people "living in the moment") and Classicists (practical, logical types). He argued that quality of life could only be achieved by straddling these attitudes: Classicists should embrace "irrational" notions such as intuition and Romantics meaningfully engage with the technology they use.
How relevant are Pirsig's views 35 years on?
Because of the "sheer technical sophistication of modern sports bikes, along with the need for specialist diagnostic equipment ... I don't service my motorbike any more", says Andy Gelme, a motorcyclist of 25 years and a fan of Pirsig.
A distributed systems engineer, Mr Gelme adds that many common devices, from computers to mobiles, "are too complex for any one person to completely understand, from the base hardware to the complete stack of software". However, that doesn't mean we should throw up our hands in despair or wash them of personal responsibility.
Arguably, there is still a need for "old-fashioned gumption" — a need to retain some mastery over tools we rely on and to explore others' potential.
Mr Gelme still performs basic checks on aspects of his bike not dependent on specialised knowledge or equipment, such as tyres and fluids — "as should every bike rider, for their own safety and ease of mind", he says. This "ease of mind" goes deep, even more so in this technological age than for Pirsig's Luddite motorcyclist, whose frustration resulted from feeling powerless.
Training people re-entering the workforce has shown Veechi Curtis how "technology can either be empowering or an impediment, depending on their attitude to it", she says. An author of numerous books about small business and accounting software, including Dummies guides, Curtis says that when technology becomes a barrier, "it can be very disempowering because people aren't really understanding what's going on in their business".
Of course, the most common tools in our business and personal lives have user-friendly interfaces, enabling the least tech-savvy to use them. An unfortunate side-effect of this, Mr Gelme says, is that "general users of technology have no idea about how an appliance really works, which means they may not know how to use it most effectively or repair it".
He adds: "Hiding the internal operation with an intuitive interface is compounded by the manufacturer's natural tendencies to protect their product from competitors and to increase sales by ensuring broken appliances have to be replaced, not repaired." This is achieved mainly through proprietary software.
Mr Gelme argues that society's almost enforced predilection for discarding broken things is no longer acceptable, given our limited resources and the environmental repercussions. Furthermore, he believes manufacturers should not "lock you out of your own possessions", preventing their repair or other interventions to fully utilise their potential.
Enter the hackers. No, not malicious geeks who break into computer systems — "true" hackers refer to them as "crackers". The word's original meaning, which persists among the cognoscenti, is people "who hack together technologies and systems to build cool things", Con Zymaris says.
"Hackers are the people that built the personal computer and the internet," says Mr Zymaris, whose company, Cybersource, assists businesses to migrate from proprietary software to open-source alternatives.
"These are examples of users who produced benefits, spectacular, world-changing benefits, through gaining an understanding of the technologies at their disposal and extending them in new and interesting ways."
In recent years, hackers with diverse skills and interests, from electronics to performance art, have banded together to form "hackerspaces". By sharing knowledge, equipment and physical spaces, they can overcome the barriers of complexity in many products.
Hackers show Pirsig's "old-fashioned gumption" in action and also demonstrate Romantic and Classical thinking in tandem — new technology is the result of creativity and intuition, not just logic and reason.
Arguably, these two perspectives are increasingly coming together. As technology goes mainstream, creative people such as musicians and digital artists embrace it and good design becomes important to products' usability and appeal.
The author of Click Here, Rich Evans, an internet development and online marketing consultant, says that when Zen was written, technology was "quite ugly". Computers, for example, were "brown boxes" with "horrible, glowing green screens". The internet, he says, was the first instance "in a very long time, of design and technology coming back together", as its success is as much dependent on form as function.
Evans points to "one school of thought that Apple's not a technology company; they're a design company". The success of offerings such as the iPod is due to the fact that "it's a nicely designed product that's easy to use", he says.
Of course, inventing the internet or designing the iPod is out of most people's league but a basic mastery of essential tools is possible. This may require consulting manuals (Pirsig wrote computer manuals and advocated their use and clear presentation). Increasingly, helpful online forums and wikis are other options, whatever "art of maintenance" is being attempted.
A co-founder of Melbourne HackerSpace, and an advocate of Pirsig's view that "the real cycle you're working on is a cycle called 'yourself"', Mr Gelme concludes that "being able to understand, repair and, best of all, customise technology to suit new purposes provides a better quality of life. It empowers people to innovate and helps them avoid feelings of powerlessness.
"Everyone should insist on open standards for all infrastructure and, whenever possible, open-source design and good documentation for all appliances, equipment and tools, so that we can repair and re-use them as much as possible."
"The Labour Party is corrupt beyond redemption!" - Labour hasbeen Mark Latham in a moment of honest clarity.
"This is the recession we had to have!" - Paul Keating explaining why he gave Australia another Labour recession.
"Silly old bugger!" - Well known ACTU pisspot and sometime Labour prime minister Bob Hawke responding to a pensioner who dared ask for more.
"By 1990, no child will live in poverty" - Bob Hawke again, desperate to win another election.
"A billion trees ..." - Borke, pissed as a newt again.
"Well may we say 'God save the Queen' because nothing will save the governor general!" - Egotistical shithead and pompous fuckwit E.G. Whitlam whining about his appointee for Governor General John Kerr.
"SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU DUMB CUNT!" - FlangesBum on learning the truth about Labour's economic capabilities.
"I don't care what you fuckers think!" - KRudd the KRude at his finest again.
"We'll just change it all when we get in." - Garrett the carrott
Yes, it makes more sense to replace most of it than to repair it.
> 'WE NEED a return to individual integrity, self-reliance and > old-fashioned gumption," wrote Robert Pirsig in 1974's Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. This seminal book is > ostensibly about a motorcycle road trip but the narrative is primarily a framework for his philosophical reflections, > centering on the view that modern "man is separated from what he does". > Pirsig's prime example is the road-tripper who intentionally remained ignorant of how to maintain or repair his > motorcycle, then became angry if it broke down.
And then the world moved on with PCs most obviously.
> When Zen was published, society had, according to its author, become divided into Romantics (creative people "living > in the moment") and Classicists (practical, logical types).
That had happened a hell of a long time before that.
> He argued that quality of life could only be achieved by straddling these attitudes: Classicists should embrace > "irrational" notions such as intuition and Romantics meaningfully engage with the technology they use.
Hordes of them arent capable of doing either.
> How relevant are Pirsig's views 35 years on?
Not very.
> Because of the "sheer technical sophistication of modern sports > bikes, along with the need for specialist diagnostic equipment ... I don't service my motorbike any more", says Andy > Gelme, a motorcyclist of 25 years and a fan of Pirsig.
And hordes arent stupid enough to bother with a motorbike at all.
> A distributed systems engineer, Mr Gelme adds that many common > devices, from computers to mobiles, "are too complex for any one > person to completely understand, from the base hardware to the > complete stack of software". However, that doesn't mean we should > throw up our hands in despair or wash them of personal responsibility. > Arguably, there is still a need for "old-fashioned gumption" - a need to retain some mastery over tools we rely on and > to explore others' potential.
There is no need when they are so trivially replaceable for peanuts and the technology keeps moving on so dramatically.
Its different with technology like cutlery that has stopped advancing much, but then it doesnt need any real maintenance except being tossed in the dishwasher when its been used etc.
> Mr Gelme still performs basic checks on aspects of his bike not > dependent on specialised knowledge or equipment, such as tyres and fluids - "as should every bike rider, for their own > safety and ease of mind", he says. This "ease of mind" goes deep, even more so in this technological age than for > Pirsig's Luddite motorcyclist, whose frustration resulted from feeling powerless.
And you dont need to bother with a decently designed laptop.
> Training people re-entering the workforce
Its only the dregs that need any 'training'
> has shown Veechi Curtis how "technology can either be empowering or an impediment, depending on their attitude to it", > she says.
Must be one of those rocket scientist stupids.
> An author of numerous books about small business and accounting software, including Dummies guides,
Hardly anyone bothers with shit like that anymore.
> Curtis says that when technology becomes a barrier, "it can be very disempowering because people aren't really > understanding what's going on in their business".
Waffle.
> Of course, the most common tools in our business and personal lives have user-friendly interfaces, enabling the least > tech-savvy to use them. An unfortunate side-effect of this, Mr Gelme says, is that "general users of technology have > no idea about how an appliance really works,
They dont need to. Just like they dont need to know how an internal combustion engine works for a car to be useful.
> which means they may not know how to use it most effectively
If its been designed properly, that will be obvious.
> or repair it".
There are always plenty who can.
> He adds: "Hiding the internal operation with an intuitive interface is > compounded by the manufacturer's natural tendencies to protect their product from competitors and to increase sales by > ensuring broken appliances have to be replaced, not repaired." This is achieved mainly through proprietary software.
And the nett result works fine for normal work, otherwise it wont sell.
> Mr Gelme argues that society's almost enforced predilection for discarding broken things is no longer acceptable, > given our limited resources and the environmental repercussions.
Utterly mindless silly stuff. Only a terminal fuckwit hobbles along on a 386SX running DOS today for those reasons.
Or even hobbles along with a T200 phone when a decent cordless phone leaves it for dead convenience wise.
Or is stupid enough to try a long trip in a Morris Minor etc.
> Furthermore, he believes manufacturers should not "lock you out of your own possessions", preventing their repair or > other interventions to fully utilise their potential.
You're always free to never buy any product done like that.
> Enter the hackers.
Nope.
> No, not malicious geeks who break into computer systems - "true" hackers refer to them as "crackers". The word's > original meaning, which persists among the cognoscenti, is people "who hack together technologies and systems to build > cool things", > Con Zymaris says.
Stolen from someone else and you're so stupid you didnt even notice.
> "Hackers are the people that built the personal computer and the > internet," says Mr Zymaris, whose company, Cybersource, assists > businesses to migrate from proprietary software to open-source > alternatives.
Only fools bother.
> "These are examples of users who produced benefits, spectacular, > world-changing benefits, through gaining an understanding of the > technologies at their disposal and extending them in new and > interesting ways."
Fuck all have done anything like that.
> In recent years, hackers with diverse skills and interests, from > electronics to performance art, have banded together to form > "hackerspaces". By sharing knowledge, equipment and physical spaces, > they can overcome the barriers of complexity in many products.
Waffle.
> Hackers show Pirsig's "old-fashioned gumption" in action and also demonstrate Romantic and Classical thinking in > tandem
Nope.
> - new technology is the result of creativity and intuition, not just logic and reason.
New technology always was.
> Arguably, these two perspectives are increasingly coming together. As technology goes mainstream, creative people such > as musicians and digital artists embrace it and good design becomes important to > products' usability and appeal. > The author of Click Here, Rich Evans, an internet development and online marketing consultant,
Wanker, actualy.
> says that when Zen was written, technology was "quite ugly".
Pig ignorant lie.
> Computers, for example, were "brown boxes" with "horrible, glowing green screens".
Wota fucking wanker...
> The internet, he says, was the first instance "in a very long time, of design and technology coming back together",
Pigs arse it was. The PC did that in spades.
> as its success is as much dependent on form as function.
Mindlessly silly.
> Evans points to "one school of thought that Apple's not a technology company; they're a design company".
You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out.
> The success of offerings such as the iPod is due to the fact that "it's a nicely designed product that's easy to use", > he says.
Must be one of those rocket scientist wankers.
> Of course, inventing the internet or designing the iPod is out of most people's league but a basic mastery of > essential tools is possible. This may require consulting manuals (Pirsig wrote computer manuals and advocated their > use and clear presentation).
And properly designed stuff doesnt need a manual, its intuitive to use.
> Increasingly, helpful online forums and wikis are other options, whatever "art of maintenance" is being attempted.
Wota fucking wanker...
> A co-founder of Melbourne HackerSpace, and an advocate of Pirsig's view that "the real cycle you're working on is a > cycle called 'yourself"', Mr Gelme concludes that "being able to understand, repair and, best of all, customise > technology to suit new purposes provides a better quality of life. It empowers people to innovate and helps them avoid > feelings of powerlessness. > "Everyone should insist on open standards for all infrastructure
Then there's the real world...
> and, whenever possible, open-source design and good documentation for all appliances, equipment and tools, so that we > can repair and re-use them as much as possible."
> In recent years, hackers with diverse skills and interests, from electronics > to > performance art, have banded together to form "hackerspaces". By sharing > knowledge, equipment and physical spaces, they can overcome the barriers of > complexity in many products.
On the very slight off chance that anyone else read this far, was interested in the idea of hackerspaces, and happens to be in Sydney...
-- As your attorney, I advise you to rent a very fast car with no top. And you'll need the cocaine. Tape recorder for special music. Acapulco shirts. Get the hell out of L.A. for at least 48 hours. Blows my weekend.
On Nov 6, 6:49 am, Iain Chalmers <bigi...@mightymedia.com.au> wrote:
> > In recent years, hackers with diverse skills and interests, from electronics > > to > > performance art, have banded together to form "hackerspaces". By sharing > > knowledge, equipment and physical spaces, they can overcome the barriers of > > complexity in many products.
> On the very slight off chance that anyone else read this far,
I did, and I'm sorry. Pirsig should never have been released from the asylum, but I suppose he had to make room for Miss Maunder who obviously hasn't read Pirsig's book.
On Nov 6, 10:44 am, Diogenes <cy...@society.sux.ok> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:57:29 -0800 (PST), theo
> <theodo...@bigpond.com.au> wrote: > > Pirsig should never have been released from the asylum...
> Can you explain why you say that, Theo? (I presume that any reply > will be referenced back to ZATAOMM.)
What do you want? Page number references where he says he was/is totally mentally unstable? IMHO, having read the book twice, once on release and again a couple of years ago, the man had a mental breakdown and rambled on about it in a book which had nothing to do with motorcycles or, in my limited understanding of the subject, Zen. His 'trip' was escapism from his own mind and from the portion of the world he had previously lived in.
Just because it has the word Motorcycle in the title and was lauded by self-appraised critics who have probably never even sat on a bicycle doesn't mean I, or anybody else, can't see the book for the drivel it really was. But hey, that's just my opinion, he may be the guru on the rusty 250 Honda you were searching for.
>> Knowing technology well enough to be able to repair it is a lost art, >> writes Patricia Maunder.
> Yes, it makes more sense to replace most of it than to repair it.
That would put a lot of panelbeaters out of business for a start.
>> 'WE NEED a return to individual integrity, self-reliance and >> old-fashioned gumption," wrote Robert Pirsig in 1974's Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. This seminal book is >> ostensibly about a motorcycle road trip but the narrative is primarily a framework for his philosophical reflections, >> centering on the view that modern "man is separated from what he does".
>> Pirsig's prime example is the road-tripper who intentionally remained ignorant of how to maintain or repair his >> motorcycle, then became angry if it broke down.
> And then the world moved on with PCs most obviously.
PCs have always been too complicated for the average, untrained person to repair.
>> When Zen was published, society had, according to its author, become divided into Romantics (creative people "living >> in the moment") and Classicists (practical, logical types).
> That had happened a hell of a long time before that.
Yes, and the two groups are known by different names today. Beauty and geek being one of many.
>> He argued that quality of life could only be achieved by straddling these attitudes: Classicists should embrace >> "irrational" notions such as intuition and Romantics meaningfully engage with the technology they use.
> Hordes of them arent capable of doing either.
True.
>> How relevant are Pirsig's views 35 years on?
> Not very.
I suspect you'll find they are just as relevant now as then.
>> Because of the "sheer technical sophistication of modern sports >> bikes, along with the need for specialist diagnostic equipment ... I don't service my motorbike any more", says Andy >> Gelme, a motorcyclist of 25 years and a fan of Pirsig.
> And hordes arent stupid enough to bother with a motorbike at all.
But some are.
>> A distributed systems engineer, Mr Gelme adds that many common >> devices, from computers to mobiles, "are too complex for any one >> person to completely understand, from the base hardware to the >> complete stack of software". However, that doesn't mean we should >> throw up our hands in despair or wash them of personal responsibility.
>> Arguably, there is still a need for "old-fashioned gumption" - a need to retain some mastery over tools we rely on and >> to explore others' potential.
> There is no need when they are so trivially replaceable for > peanuts and the technology keeps moving on so dramatically.
That depends. A motorbike engine isn't replaceable for peanuts and you probably can't replace it with a new model without replacing more of the bike.
> Its different with technology like cutlery that has stopped advancing > much, but then it doesnt need any real maintenance except being > tossed in the dishwasher when its been used etc.
>> Mr Gelme still performs basic checks on aspects of his bike not >> dependent on specialised knowledge or equipment, such as tyres and fluids - "as should every bike rider, for their own >> safety and ease of mind", he says. This "ease of mind" goes deep, even more so in this technological age than for >> Pirsig's Luddite motorcyclist, whose frustration resulted from feeling powerless.
> And you dont need to bother with a decently designed laptop.
>> Training people re-entering the workforce
> Its only the dregs that need any 'training'
>> has shown Veechi Curtis how "technology can either be empowering or an impediment, depending on their attitude to it", >> she says.
> Must be one of those rocket scientist stupids.
>> An author of numerous books about small business and accounting software, including Dummies guides,
> Hardly anyone bothers with shit like that anymore.
Dummies do.
>> Curtis says that when technology becomes a barrier, "it can be very disempowering because people aren't really >> understanding what's going on in their business".
> Waffle.
>> Of course, the most common tools in our business and personal lives have user-friendly interfaces, enabling the least >> tech-savvy to use them. An unfortunate side-effect of this, Mr Gelme says, is that "general users of technology have >> no idea about how an appliance really works,
> They dont need to. Just like they dont need to know how > an internal combustion engine works for a car to be useful.
But they do need to know basic maintenance like adding petrol, oil, air, checking tyres, brakes, etc.
>> which means they may not know how to use it most effectively
> If its been designed properly, that will be obvious.
Like Windows Vista?
>> or repair it".
> There are always plenty who can.
>> He adds: "Hiding the internal operation with an intuitive interface is >> compounded by the manufacturer's natural tendencies to protect their product from competitors and to increase sales by >> ensuring broken appliances have to be replaced, not repaired." This is achieved mainly through proprietary software.
> And the nett result works fine for normal work, otherwise it wont sell.
>> Mr Gelme argues that society's almost enforced predilection for discarding broken things is no longer acceptable, >> given our limited resources and the environmental repercussions.
> Utterly mindless silly stuff. Only a terminal fuckwit hobbles > along on a 386SX running DOS today for those reasons.
But if it gets the job done? An old bike still gets you from A to B.
> Or even hobbles along with a T200 phone when a decent > cordless phone leaves it for dead convenience wise.
Does that include all the noise and interference?
> Or is stupid enough to try a long trip in a Morris Minor etc.
Why not?
>> Furthermore, he believes manufacturers should not "lock you out of your own possessions", preventing their repair or >> other interventions to fully utilise their potential.
> You're always free to never buy any product done like that.
>> Enter the hackers.
> Nope.
>> No, not malicious geeks who break into computer systems - "true" hackers refer to them as "crackers". The word's >> original meaning, which persists among the cognoscenti, is people "who hack together technologies and systems to build >> cool things", Con Zymaris says.
> Stolen from someone else and you're so stupid you didnt even notice.
>> "Hackers are the people that built the personal computer and the >> internet," says Mr Zymaris, whose company, Cybersource, assists >> businesses to migrate from proprietary software to open-source >> alternatives.
> Only fools bother.
>> "These are examples of users who produced benefits, spectacular, >> world-changing benefits, through gaining an understanding of the >> technologies at their disposal and extending them in new and >> interesting ways."
> Fuck all have done anything like that.
>> In recent years, hackers with diverse skills and interests, from >> electronics to performance art, have banded together to form >> "hackerspaces". By sharing knowledge, equipment and physical spaces, >> they can overcome the barriers of complexity in many products.
> Waffle.
>> Hackers show Pirsig's "old-fashioned gumption" in action and also demonstrate Romantic and Classical thinking in >> tandem
> Nope.
>> - new technology is the result of creativity and intuition, not just logic and reason.
> New technology always was.
>> Arguably, these two perspectives are increasingly coming together. As technology goes mainstream, creative people such >> as musicians and digital artists embrace it and good design becomes important to >> products' usability and appeal.
>> The author of Click Here, Rich Evans, an internet development and online marketing consultant,
> Wanker, actualy.
>> says that when Zen was written, technology was "quite ugly".
> Pig ignorant lie.
>> Computers, for example, were "brown boxes" with "horrible, glowing green screens".
> Wota fucking wanker...
>> The internet, he says, was the first instance "in a very long time, of design and technology coming back together",
> Pigs arse it was. The PC did that in spades.
>> as its success is as much dependent on form as function.
> Mindlessly silly.
>> Evans points to "one school of thought that Apple's not a technology company; they're a design company".
> You'll end up completely blind if you dont watch out.
>> The success of offerings such as the iPod is due to the fact that "it's a nicely designed product that's easy to use", >> he says.
> Must be one of those rocket scientist wankers.
>> Of course, inventing the internet or designing the iPod is out of most people's league but a basic mastery of >> essential tools is possible. This may require consulting manuals (Pirsig wrote computer manuals and advocated their >> use and clear presentation).
> And properly designed stuff doesnt need a manual, its intuitive to use.
>> Increasingly, helpful online forums and wikis are other options, whatever "art of maintenance" is being attempted.
theo wrote: > On Nov 6, 10:44 am, Diogenes <cy...@society.sux.ok> wrote: >> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:57:29 -0800 (PST), theo
>> <theodo...@bigpond.com.au> wrote: >>> Pirsig should never have been released from the asylum... >> Can you explain why you say that, Theo? (I presume that any reply >> will be referenced back to ZATAOMM.)
> What do you want? Page number references where he says he was/is > totally mentally unstable?
He wasn't totally mentally unstable. He had a breakdown due to concentrating on a philosophical problem for too long.
> IMHO, having read the book twice, once on > release and again a couple of years ago, the man had a mental > breakdown and rambled on about it in a book which had nothing to do > with motorcycles or, in my limited understanding of the subject, Zen. > His 'trip' was escapism from his own mind and from the portion of the > world he had previously lived in.
The book was actually his examination of some aspects of the philosophical problem he was delving into. That would become clearer if you've read his second book "Lila: An Enquire Into Morals".
> Just because it has the word Motorcycle in the title and was lauded by > self-appraised critics who have probably never even sat on a bicycle > doesn't mean I, or anybody else, can't see the book for the drivel it > really was. But hey, that's just my opinion, he may be the guru on the > rusty 250 Honda you were searching for.
"The Labour Party is corrupt beyond redemption!" - Labour hasbeen Mark Latham in a moment of honest clarity.
"This is the recession we had to have!" - Paul Keating explaining why he gave Australia another Labour recession.
"Silly old bugger!" - Well known ACTU pisspot and sometime Labour prime minister Bob Hawke responding to a pensioner who dared ask for more.
"By 1990, no child will live in poverty" - Bob Hawke again, desperate to win another election.
"A billion trees ..." - Borke, pissed as a newt again.
"Well may we say 'God save the Queen' because nothing will save the governor general!" - Egotistical shithead and pompous fuckwit E.G. Whitlam whining about his appointee for Governor General John Kerr.
"SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU DUMB CUNT!" - FlangesBum on learning the truth about Labour's economic capabilities.
"I don't care what you fuckers think!" - KRudd the KRude at his finest again.
"We'll just change it all when we get in." - Garrett the carrott
<theodo...@bigpond.com.au> wrote: >On Nov 6, 10:44 am, Diogenes <cy...@society.sux.ok> wrote: >> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:57:29 -0800 (PST), theo
>> <theodo...@bigpond.com.au> wrote: >> > Pirsig should never have been released from the asylum...
>> Can you explain why you say that, Theo? (I presume that any reply >> will be referenced back to ZATAOMM.)
>What do you want? Page number references where he says he was/is >totally mentally unstable?
Yes, I s'pose it _was_ a silly question. I guess what I meant was that just because one has a certain opinion about the strangeness of Pirsig, this should not translate into a desire to see him locked up for life. Perhaps I took you too literally.
>IMHO, having read the book twice, once on >release and again a couple of years ago, the man had a mental >breakdown and rambled on about it in a book which had nothing to do >with motorcycles or, in my limited understanding of the subject, Zen.
Well, I had a different take on the book. I found the way he relates to his motorcycle interesting and as valid as anyone else's.
And I found lots of his thinking to be quite compatible with zen thought.
I also found his philosophical musings interesting.
There seems to be a Dutch/German cultural legacy which would encourage people to lock up anyone who does not see the world in the same way as they do. I think it's time this trait was made redundant or at least exposed for what it is - arrogantly dictatorial.
>His 'trip' was escapism from his own mind and from the portion of the >world he had previously lived in.
Your opinion is noted, but not necessarily given the same weight as anything resembling an absolute truth.
>Just because it has the word Motorcycle in the title and was lauded by >self-appraised critics who have probably never even sat on a bicycle >doesn't mean I, or anybody else, can't see the book for the drivel it >really was.
Well, Theo, that piece of fallacious reasoning nicely invalidates and dismisses anyone who disagrees with your appraisal of the book. How very Dutch of you...
See, Theo, the thing that gets me is that it's not just your opinion, it's that you are so arrgantly conviced of the absolute truth of your opinion that you feel the need to invaidate and deride anyone who differs with you.
And you wonder why I take great delight in parody-ing this type of mindset in this newsgroup?
>But hey, that's just my opinion, he may be the guru on the >rusty 250 Honda you were searching for.
He was on a Beemer, and I wasn't looking for a gury, and he's not it anyway. As I said, you're not just dismissive of his book, you're dismissive of anyone who sees any merit in the book. How very Dutch of you.
On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:33:21 +1100, Diogenes wrote:
> He was on a Beemer, and I wasn't looking for a gury, and he's not it > anyway. As I said, you're not just dismissive of his book, you're > dismissive of anyone who sees any merit in the book. How very Dutch of > you.
> Thanks for your time.
> =================
> Onya bike
> Gerry
I don't think you're right about the bike, Gerry - I've always understood he was on a Honda CB350. It was his friends (John(?) and Sylvia(?)) who were on the Beemer.
That aside, while I disagree with almost everything Theo has to say about the book, I read it a few times soon after it was published, but when I tried to re-read it a couple of years ago, I couldn't - stylistically at least, it hasn't aged well at all. So I got rid of our copy, which is why I can't refresh my memory on his friend's names.
Dr. Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF" <""noujwas\"@yahoo.com . wrote
> Rod Speed wrote >> Dr. Sir John Howard, AC, WSCMoF" <""noujwas\"@yahoo.com . wrote >>> http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/down-to-the-nuts-and... >>> Knowing technology well enough to be able to repair it is a lost art, writes Patricia Maunder. >> Yes, it makes more sense to replace most of it than to repair it. > That would put a lot of panelbeaters out of business for a start.
Nope, thats just part of the non most.
>>> 'WE NEED a return to individual integrity, self-reliance and >>> old-fashioned gumption," wrote Robert Pirsig in 1974's Zen and the >>> Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. This seminal book is ostensibly >>> about a motorcycle road trip but the narrative is primarily a >>> framework for his philosophical reflections, centering on the view >>> that modern "man is separated from what he does". >>> Pirsig's prime example is the road-tripper who intentionally >>> remained ignorant of how to maintain or repair his motorcycle, then >>> became angry if it broke down. >> And then the world moved on with PCs most obviously. > PCs have always been too complicated for the average, untrained person to repair.
Yes, but so have motorbikes, and it aint about training either.
>>> When Zen was published, society had, according to its author, >>> become divided into Romantics (creative people "living in the >>> moment") and Classicists (practical, logical types). >> That had happened a hell of a long time before that. > Yes, and the two groups are known by different names today. Beauty and geek being one of many.
Its much more complicated than that binary stuff.
>>> He argued that quality of life could only be achieved by straddling >>> these attitudes: Classicists should embrace "irrational" notions >>> such as intuition and Romantics meaningfully engage with the >>> technology they use. >> Hordes of them arent capable of doing either. > True. >>> How relevant are Pirsig's views 35 years on? >> Not very. > I suspect you'll find they are just as relevant now as then.
Nope, significantly less so now.
Certainly PC repair has been added to motorbike and car repair, but PCs dont fail that often and repair is pretty easy to do.
>>> Because of the "sheer technical sophistication of modern sports >>> bikes, along with the need for specialist diagnostic equipment ... >>> I don't service my motorbike any more", says Andy Gelme, a >>> motorcyclist of 25 years and a fan of Pirsig. >> And hordes arent stupid enough to bother with a motorbike at all. > But some are.
Sure. And certainly a lot more are stupid enough to ride push bikes now.
Not much rocket science needed for them tho.
Presumably quite a few do their jet skis etc and other stuff like chainsaws and whipper snippers now too.
>>> A distributed systems engineer, Mr Gelme adds that many common >>> devices, from computers to mobiles, "are too complex for any one >>> person to completely understand, from the base hardware to the >>> complete stack of software". However, that doesn't mean we should >>> throw up our hands in despair or wash them of personal responsibility. >>> Arguably, there is still a need for "old-fashioned gumption" - a need to retain some mastery over tools we rely on >>> and to explore others' potential. >> There is no need when they are so trivially replaceable for >> peanuts and the technology keeps moving on so dramatically. > That depends. A motorbike engine isn't replaceable for peanuts
Thats not a tool we rely on, thats a toy.
> and you probably can't replace it with a new model without replacing more of the bike.
True, but most dont do that sort of work, and most never did.
>> Its different with technology like cutlery that has stopped advancing >> much, but then it doesnt need any real maintenance except being >> tossed in the dishwasher when its been used etc. > So what's wrong with washing it by hand?
Too much farting around. I dont wash the clothes by hand either.
>>> Mr Gelme still performs basic checks on aspects of his bike not >>> dependent on specialised knowledge or equipment, such as tyres and fluids - "as should every bike rider, for their >>> own safety and ease of mind", he says. This "ease of mind" goes deep, even more so in this technological age than >>> for Pirsig's Luddite motorcyclist, whose frustration resulted from feeling powerless. >> And you dont need to bother with a decently designed laptop. >>> Training people re-entering the workforce >> Its only the dregs that need any 'training' >>> has shown Veechi Curtis how "technology can either be empowering or an impediment, depending on their attitude to >>> it", she says. >> Must be one of those rocket scientist stupids. >>> An author of numerous books about small business and accounting software, including Dummies guides, >> Hardly anyone bothers with shit like that anymore. > Dummies do.
Sure, a few do.
>>> Curtis says that when technology becomes a barrier, "it can be very >>> disempowering because people aren't really understanding what's >>> going on in their business". >> Waffle. >>> Of course, the most common tools in our business and personal lives >>> have user-friendly interfaces, enabling the least tech-savvy to use >>> them. An unfortunate side-effect of this, Mr Gelme says, is that >>> "general users of technology have no idea about how an appliance >>> really works, >> They dont need to. Just like they dont need to know how >> an internal combustion engine works for a car to be useful. > But they do need to know basic maintenance like adding petrol, oil, air, checking tyres, brakes, etc.
Thats not maintenance and most dont do anything more than petrol and the washer fill up.
>>> which means they may not know how to use it most effectively >> If its been designed properly, that will be obvious. > Like Windows Vista?
Yes, its obvious enough to all but fools, specially stuff like the popup when you plug in a USB stick or card etc.
>>> or repair it". >> There are always plenty who can. >>> He adds: "Hiding the internal operation with an intuitive interface is compounded by the manufacturer's natural >>> tendencies to protect >>> their product from competitors and to increase sales by ensuring >>> broken appliances have to be replaced, not repaired." This is >>> achieved mainly through proprietary software. >> And the nett result works fine for normal work, otherwise it wont sell. >>> Mr Gelme argues that society's almost enforced predilection for >>> discarding broken things is no longer acceptable, given our limited >>> resources and the environmental repercussions. >> Utterly mindless silly stuff. Only a terminal fuckwit hobbles >> along on a 386SX running DOS today for those reasons. > But if it gets the job done?
It doesnt on the fucked UI alone.
> An old bike still gets you from A to B.
PCs advance a hell of a lot faster than pushbikes.
>> Or even hobbles along with a T200 phone when a decent >> cordless phone leaves it for dead convenience wise. > Does that include all the noise and interference?
No noise or interference on mine.
>> Or is stupid enough to try a long trip in a Morris Minor etc. > Why not?
Too much farting around with a fucked body anyway.
I'd do it with a beetle, and have done too, but not with a Morris Minor etc.
>>> Furthermore, he believes manufacturers should not "lock you out of your own possessions", preventing their repair or >>> other interventions to fully utilise their potential. >> You're always free to never buy any product done like that. >>> Enter the hackers. >> Nope. >>> No, not malicious geeks who break into computer systems - "true" >>> hackers refer to them as "crackers". The word's original meaning, >>> which persists among the cognoscenti, is people "who hack together >>> technologies and systems to build cool things", Con Zymaris says. >> Stolen from someone else and you're so stupid you didnt even notice. > Who are you addressing?
>>> "Hackers are the people that built the personal computer and the >>> internet," says Mr Zymaris, whose company, Cybersource, assists >>> businesses to migrate from proprietary software to open-source >>> alternatives. >> Only fools bother. >>> "These are examples of users who produced benefits, spectacular, >>> world-changing benefits, through gaining an understanding of the >>> technologies at their disposal and extending them in new and >>> interesting ways." >> Fuck all have done anything like that. >>> In recent years, hackers with diverse skills and interests, from >>> electronics to performance art, have banded together to form >>> "hackerspaces". By sharing knowledge, equipment and physical spaces, >>> they can overcome the barriers of complexity in many products. >> Waffle. >>> Hackers show Pirsig's "old-fashioned gumption" in action and also demonstrate Romantic and Classical thinking in >>> tandem >> Nope. >>> - new technology is the result of creativity and intuition, not just logic and reason. >> New technology always was. >>> Arguably, these two perspectives are increasingly coming together. >>> As technology goes mainstream, creative people such as musicians >>> and digital artists embrace it and good design becomes important to products' usability and appeal. >>> The author of Click Here, Rich Evans, an internet development and >>> online marketing consultant, >> Wanker, actualy. >>> says that when Zen was written, technology was "quite ugly". >> Pig ignorant lie. >>> Computers, for example, were "brown boxes" with "horrible, glowing green screens". >> Wota fucking wanker... >>> The internet, he says, was the first instance "in a very long time, >>> of design and technology coming back together", >> Pigs arse it was. The PC did that in spades. >>> as its success is as much dependent on form as function. >> Mindlessly silly. >>> Evans points to
On Nov 6, 1:33 pm, Diogenes <cy...@society.sux.ok> wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 18:51:43 -0800 (PST), theo > >What do you want? Page number references where he says he was/is > >totally mentally unstable?
> Yes, I s'pose it _was_ a silly question. I guess what I meant was > that just because one has a certain opinion about the strangeness of > Pirsig, this should not translate into a desire to see him locked up > for life. Perhaps I took you too literally.
You certainly did. I would never want to see anyone locked up for life. In the case of Pirsig I feel that because he was part of the inteligensia and because of the stigma atached to mental illness and breakdown he was allowed to go out and "heal himself" with solitude rather than be given the help he appeared, to me, to desperately need. On a couple of occassions he stopped in the shade of a tree for a whole day. That may seem very Zen but he just didn't know what to do next.
> There seems to be a Dutch/German cultural legacy which would encourage > people to lock up anyone who does not see the world in the same way as > they do. I think it's time this trait was made redundant or at least > exposed for what it is - arrogantly dictatorial.
Are you serious or just being racist. The Dutch had one of the first European governments to have a parliament.
> >His 'trip' was escapism from his own mind and from the portion of the > >world he had previously lived in.
> Your opinion is noted, but not necessarily given the same weight as > anything resembling an absolute truth.
Of course not, your impressions are obviously different. That doesn't necessarily make mine invalid, or your's incorrect.
> >Just because it has the word Motorcycle in the title and was lauded by > >self-appraised critics who have probably never even sat on a bicycle > >doesn't mean I, or anybody else, can't see the book for the drivel it > >really was.
> Well, Theo, that piece of fallacious reasoning nicely invalidates and > dismisses anyone who disagrees with your appraisal of the book. > How very Dutch of you... > See, Theo, the thing that gets me is that it's not just your opinion, > it's that you are so arrgantly conviced of the absolute truth of your > opinion that you feel the need to invaidate and deride anyone who > differs with you.
Geez you're a tight-arsed wanker Gerry. Unpucker those cheeks.
> And you wonder why I take great delight in parody-ing this type of > mindset in this newsgroup?
ROTFL.
> >But hey, that's just my opinion, he may be the guru on the > >rusty 250 Honda you were searching for.
> He was on a Beemer,
I thought you said you read the book several times? It was a small Honda, as evidenced by several occassions where he was forced to stop because of headwinds causing the bike to overheat.
> He wasn't and I wasn't looking for a gury, and he's not it > anyway. As I said, you're not just dismissive of his book, you're > dismissive of anyone who sees any merit in the book. How very Dutch > of you.
<amckNOSPAM3...@telNOSPAMstra.com> wrote: >On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:33:21 +1100, Diogenes wrote: >> He was on a Beemer, and I wasn't looking for a gury, and he's not it >> anyway. As I said, you're not just dismissive of his book, you're >> dismissive of anyone who sees any merit in the book. How very Dutch of >> you.
>> Thanks for your time. >I don't think you're right about the bike, Gerry - I've always understood >he was on a Honda CB350. It was his friends (John(?) and Sylvia(?)) who >were on the Beemer.
Ahhh... You're right. (You made me get the book off the shelf) The Beemer was his friend's bike. It was an R60.
>That aside, while I disagree with almost everything Theo has to say about >the book, I read it a few times soon after it was published, but when I >tried to re-read it a couple of years ago, I couldn't - stylistically at >least, it hasn't aged well at all. So I got rid of our copy, which is why >I can't refresh my memory on his friend's names.
The Beemer owner's name is John Sutherland. His wife's name is Sylvia.
People who want to slam the book ought to at least read the Wikipedia article abou the book because it may explain a few things for them _before_ they air their ignorance and thus they may do a better quality critique.
Andrew wrote: > I don't think you're right about the bike, Gerry - I've always understood > he was on a Honda CB350. It was his friends (John(?) and Sylvia(?)) who > were on the Beemer.
I found the book to be mostly loony blathering when I read it the single time about a quarter century ago but yes; the friend had the BMW. (And it was said friend and said BMW that were generally the butt of the analogies) -- Elsie.
<theodo...@bigpond.com.au> wrote: >On Nov 6, 1:33 pm, Diogenes <cy...@society.sux.ok> wrote: >> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 18:51:43 -0800 (PST), theo >> >What do you want? Page number references where he says he was/is >> >totally mentally unstable? >> Yes, I s'pose it _was_ a silly question. I guess what I meant was >> that just because one has a certain opinion about the strangeness of >> Pirsig, this should not translate into a desire to see him locked up >> for life. Perhaps I took you too literally. >You certainly did. I would never want to see anyone locked up for >life.
OK, so what did you mean by "Pirsig should never have been released from the asylum..."
> In the case of Pirsig I feel that because he was part of the >inteligensia and because of the stigma atached to mental illness and >breakdown he was allowed to go out and "heal himself" with solitude >rather than be given the help he appeared, to me, to desperately need. >On a couple of occassions he stopped in the shade of a tree for a >whole day. That may seem very Zen but he just didn't know what to do >next.
Are you saying he should have been kept in and doped up on "medications"? Back then they loved administering tricyclics a crude form of ECT? Do you know what these do to people's mental and neurological processes?
>> There seems to be a Dutch/German cultural legacy which would encourage >> people to lock up anyone who does not see the world in the same way as >> they do. I think it's time this trait was made redundant or at least >> exposed for what it is - arrogantly dictatorial. >Are you serious or just being racist?
It's an observation. Make of it what you will.
>The Dutch had one of the first European governments to have a parliament.
So? I was talking about observable traits in the Dutch and German cultures. Where does it say that such people might not form an assembly the call a "parliament"?
>> >His 'trip' was escapism from his own mind and from the portion of the >> >world he had previously lived in.
>> Your opinion is noted, but not necessarily given the same weight as >> anything resembling an absolute truth.
>Of course not, your impressions are obviously different. That doesn't >necessarily make mine invalid, or your's incorrect.
I'm glad to hear that.
>> >Just because it has the word Motorcycle in the title and was lauded by >> >self-appraised critics who have probably never even sat on a bicycle >> >doesn't mean I, or anybody else, can't see the book for the drivel it >> >really was.
>> Well, Theo, that piece of fallacious reasoning nicely invalidates and >> dismisses anyone who disagrees with your appraisal of the book. >> How very Dutch of you...
>> See, Theo, the thing that gets me is that it's not just your opinion, >> it's that you are so arrgantly conviced of the absolute truth of your >> opinion that you feel the need to invaidate and deride anyone who >> differs with you. >Geez you're a tight-arsed wanker Gerry. Unpucker those cheeks.
There you go again.
>> And you wonder why I take great delight in parody-ing this type of >> mindset in this newsgroup?
>ROTFL. >> >But hey, that's just my opinion, he may be the guru on the >> >rusty 250 Honda you were searching for.
>> He was on a Beemer,
>I thought you said you read the book several times? It was a small >Honda, as evidenced by several occassions where he was forced to stop >because of headwinds causing the bike to overheat.
Since my mental crack-up in 1997 my memory gets a bit funny on occasions. I got mixed up about which bike was whose. It's been a long time since I've read the book. As with movies, I often forget most of the story's details soon after. But a general impression about its quality stays with me. Hence I know whether I thought a story was great or awful. I thought ZATAOMM was brilliant. Apparently, according to some Dutchmen this makes me of dubious character. Fuck you.
>> He wasn't and I wasn't looking for a gury, and he's not it >> anyway. As I said, you're not just dismissive of his book, you're >> dismissive of anyone who sees any merit in the book. How very Dutch >> of you. >How very racist of you.
Yes, innit? ;-) Don't you just love it when you're on the receiving end of stereotyping for a change? Happy-making, innit?
>> I don't think you're right about the bike, Gerry - I've always understood >> he was on a Honda CB350. It was his friends (John(?) and Sylvia(?)) who >> were on the Beemer.
>I found the book to be mostly loony blathering when I read it the single >time about a quarter century ago but yes; the friend had the BMW. (And >it was said friend and said BMW that were generally the butt of the >analogies)
I just love it when those who do not understand what they are reading feel the need to dismiss the material as "loony blathering". They say that's the function of a rampant ego doing its "thang".
> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 22:30:55 -0800 (PST), theo > <theodo...@bigpond.com.au> wrote:
>>On Nov 6, 1:33 pm, Diogenes <cy...@society.sux.ok> wrote: >>> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 18:51:43 -0800 (PST), theo
>>> >What do you want? Page number references where he says he was/is >>> >totally mentally unstable?
>>> Yes, I s'pose it _was_ a silly question. I guess what I meant was >>> that just because one has a certain opinion about the strangeness of >>> Pirsig, this should not translate into a desire to see him locked up >>> for life. Perhaps I took you too literally.
>>You certainly did. I would never want to see anyone locked up for >>life.
> OK, so what did you mean by "Pirsig should never have been released > from the asylum..."
>> In the case of Pirsig I feel that because he was part of the >>inteligensia and because of the stigma atached to mental illness and >>breakdown he was allowed to go out and "heal himself" with solitude >>rather than be given the help he appeared, to me, to desperately need. >>On a couple of occassions he stopped in the shade of a tree for a >>whole day. That may seem very Zen but he just didn't know what to do >>next.
> Are you saying he should have been kept in and doped up on > "medications"? Back then they loved administering tricyclics a crude > form of ECT? Do you know what these do to people's mental and > neurological processes?
>>> There seems to be a Dutch/German cultural legacy which would encourage >>> people to lock up anyone who does not see the world in the same way as >>> they do. I think it's time this trait was made redundant or at least >>> exposed for what it is - arrogantly dictatorial.
>>Are you serious or just being racist?
> It's an observation. Make of it what you will.
>>The Dutch had one of the first European governments to have a parliament.
> So? I was talking about observable traits in the Dutch and German > cultures. Where does it say that such people might not form an > assembly the call a "parliament"?
>>> >His 'trip' was escapism from his own mind and from the portion of the >>> >world he had previously lived in.
>>> Your opinion is noted, but not necessarily given the same weight as >>> anything resembling an absolute truth.
>>Of course not, your impressions are obviously different. That doesn't >>necessarily make mine invalid, or your's incorrect.
> I'm glad to hear that.
>>> >Just because it has the word Motorcycle in the title and was lauded by >>> >self-appraised critics who have probably never even sat on a bicycle >>> >doesn't mean I, or anybody else, can't see the book for the drivel it >>> >really was.
>>> Well, Theo, that piece of fallacious reasoning nicely invalidates and >>> dismisses anyone who disagrees with your appraisal of the book. >>> How very Dutch of you...
>>> See, Theo, the thing that gets me is that it's not just your opinion, >>> it's that you are so arrgantly conviced of the absolute truth of your >>> opinion that you feel the need to invaidate and deride anyone who >>> differs with you.
>>Geez you're a tight-arsed wanker Gerry. Unpucker those cheeks.
> There you go again.
>>> And you wonder why I take great delight in parody-ing this type of >>> mindset in this newsgroup?
>>ROTFL.
>>> >But hey, that's just my opinion, he may be the guru on the >>> >rusty 250 Honda you were searching for.
>>> He was on a Beemer,
>>I thought you said you read the book several times? It was a small >>Honda, as evidenced by several occassions where he was forced to stop >>because of headwinds causing the bike to overheat.
> Since my mental crack-up in 1997 my memory gets a bit funny on > occasions. I got mixed up about which bike was whose. It's been a > long time since I've read the book. As with movies, I often forget > most of the story's details soon after. But a general impression > about its quality stays with me. Hence I know whether I thought a > story was great or awful. I thought ZATAOMM was brilliant. > Apparently, according to some Dutchmen this makes me of dubious > character. Fuck you.
>>> He wasn't and I wasn't looking for a gury, and he's not it >>> anyway. As I said, you're not just dismissive of his book, you're >>> dismissive of anyone who sees any merit in the book. How very Dutch >>> of you.
>>How very racist of you.
> Yes, innit? ;-) Don't you just love it when you're on the > receiving end of stereotyping for a change? Happy-making, innit?
> Go kill yourself.
> =================
> Onya bike
> Gerry
I don't want to buy into the above conversation - but I do want to mention the book. I read it many many years ago and didn't get it, I suspect. I didn't enjoy it, at least, but I can't actually remember why. (It was a long time ago and I was very young).
I tried again, more recently, seeing as it's supposedly a bit of an iconic read for motorcyclists - and couldn't even get a quarter of the way through - and this time I know why. I found the style of the narrative so alienating for some reason that I simply couldn't engage with it, and therefore couldn't keep going with it. I felt as if the story was pushing me away, and I gave up the fight. I must admit, now I no longer have to read/teach for a living, I don't persevere with things that don't engage me - life's too short to read stuff I don't enjoy - but perhaps one day I'll be in the right frame of mind to attempt ZATAOMM again. After reading the comments from Theo and Gerry above, perhaps I need to have a fresh look at it...
In aus.motorcycles on Fri, 6 Nov 2009 20:35:43 +1100
bikerbetty <bikerbettyatgmaildotcom> wrote:
> I tried again, more recently, seeing as it's supposedly a bit of an iconic > read for motorcyclists - and couldn't even get a quarter of the way
I dunno about that.
It is mentioned a lot by people who don't ride bikes, presumably because it has motorcycle in the title and so they hope they have found common ground.
Dunno too many riders who think it worthwhile.
> through - and this time I know why. I found the style of the narrative so > alienating for some reason that I simply couldn't engage with it, and > therefore couldn't keep going with it. I felt as if the story was pushing
Yeah. I can't remember much about it, I vaguely recall thinking both "no shit Sherlock" and "stop whining and do something vaguely interesting dammit" and I can't even recall if I finished it.
I was just getting into bikes and thought it had something to do with them, but it didn't. I went back to trying to understand Haynes.
But then some people liked the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant so there is a market for books about whiny incompetent blowhards.
> In aus.motorcycles on Fri, 6 Nov 2009 20:35:43 +1100 > bikerbetty <bikerbettyatgmaildotcom> wrote:
>> I tried again, more recently, seeing as it's supposedly a bit of an >> iconic >> read for motorcyclists - and couldn't even get a quarter of the way
> I dunno about that.
> It is mentioned a lot by people who don't ride bikes, presumably > because it has motorcycle in the title and so they hope they have > found common ground.
> Dunno too many riders who think it worthwhile.
>> through - and this time I know why. I found the style of the narrative so >> alienating for some reason that I simply couldn't engage with it, and >> therefore couldn't keep going with it. I felt as if the story was >> pushing
> Yeah. I can't remember much about it, I vaguely recall thinking both > "no shit Sherlock" and "stop whining and do something vaguely > interesting dammit" and I can't even recall if I finished it.
> I was just getting into bikes and thought it had something to do with > them, but it didn't. I went back to trying to understand Haynes.
> But then some people liked the Chronicles of Thomas Covenant so there > is a market for books about whiny incompetent blowhards.
<theodo...@bigpond.com.au> wrote: > On Nov 6, 10:44 am, Diogenes <cy...@society.sux.ok> wrote: >> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:57:29 -0800 (PST), theo
>> <theodo...@bigpond.com.au> wrote: >>> Pirsig should never have been released from the asylum...
>> Can you explain why you say that, Theo? (I presume that any reply >> will be referenced back to ZATAOMM.)
> What do you want? Page number references where he says he was/is > totally mentally unstable? IMHO, having read the book twice, once on > release and again a couple of years ago, the man had a mental > breakdown and rambled on about it in a book which had nothing to do > with motorcycles or, in my limited understanding of the subject, Zen. > His 'trip' was escapism from his own mind and from the portion of the > world he had previously lived in.
> Just because it has the word Motorcycle in the title and was lauded by > self-appraised critics who have probably never even sat on a bicycle > doesn't mean I, or anybody else, can't see the book for the drivel it > really was. But hey, that's just my opinion, he may be the guru on the > rusty 250 Honda you were searching for.
> Theo
You must have read another book, Theo. There was plenty of motorcycle references in it. Hammo
On Fri, 06 Nov 2009 21:56:13 +1100, Hammo <ha...@aapt.net.au> wrote: >On 6/11/09 1:51 PM, in article >2af9fdf0-2c5e-40af-8080-289b71ab1...@b36g2000prf.googlegroups.com, "theo" ><theodo...@bigpond.com.au> wrote:
>> On Nov 6, 10:44 am, Diogenes <cy...@society.sux.ok> wrote: >>> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 15:57:29 -0800 (PST), theo
>>> <theodo...@bigpond.com.au> wrote: >>>> Pirsig should never have been released from the asylum...
>>> Can you explain why you say that, Theo? (I presume that any reply >>> will be referenced back to ZATAOMM.)
>> What do you want? Page number references where he says he was/is >> totally mentally unstable? IMHO, having read the book twice, once on >> release and again a couple of years ago, the man had a mental >> breakdown and rambled on about it in a book which had nothing to do >> with motorcycles or, in my limited understanding of the subject, Zen. >> His 'trip' was escapism from his own mind and from the portion of the >> world he had previously lived in.
>> Just because it has the word Motorcycle in the title and was lauded by >> self-appraised critics who have probably never even sat on a bicycle >> doesn't mean I, or anybody else, can't see the book for the drivel it >> really was. But hey, that's just my opinion, he may be the guru on the >> rusty 250 Honda you were searching for. >You must have read another book, Theo. There was plenty of motorcycle >references in it.
His mind is made up, Hammo. Don't confuse him with facts.
<bikerbettyatgmaildotcom> wrote: >I don't want to buy into the above conversation - but I do want to mention >the book. I read it many many years ago and didn't get it, I suspect. I >didn't enjoy it, at least, but I can't actually remember why. (It was a long >time ago and I was very young).
If everyone liked every book we'd be on Planet Woopwoop.
>I tried again, more recently, seeing as it's supposedly a bit of an iconic >read for motorcyclists - and couldn't even get a quarter of the way >through - and this time I know why. I found the style of the narrative so >alienating for some reason that I simply couldn't engage with it, and >therefore couldn't keep going with it. I felt as if the story was pushing >me away, and I gave up the fight. I must admit, now I no longer have to >read/teach for a living, I don't persevere with things that don't engage >me - life's too short to read stuff I don't enjoy...
I notice that you're languaging your response to the book from the point of view that the book is responsible for your reactions to it. i.e. that the book is "doing it to you", it is "making you" respond a certain way, it is responsible for your reactions? That's a victim-mentality mindset, I would argue. Have you ever considered that your reactions are a result of _your_ stuff - i.e. your values, your judgements, your expectations, your beliefs, etc., etc., etc. i.e. the book is not making you feel that way, your stuff is making you feel that way. A radical concept, I know. :-( Never mind, I've lost the plot, you know...
> ...but perhaps one day I'll be in the right frame of mind to attempt >ZATAOMM again. After reading the comments from Theo and Gerry >above, perhaps I need to have a fresh look at it...
Nah. You may never like it. And that's OK too. It's way too philosophical and "esoteric" for most people. And it is eminently easy to disagree with much of it. It is a polarising book, i.e. one's reactions to it tend to be either extremely for or extremely against.
I wouldn't argue though that those who are for it are right and those who are against it are wrong, or vice versa. I think it's a form of literary snobbery to pull a book to pieces (or praise it). But there's a lot of that going on these days. Like everyone is lecturer in literature. What a wank. Pompousness is the new black.
You either like it or you don't. You either "get" it or you don't. (generic "you")
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 20:35:43 +1100, "bikerbetty" > <bikerbettyatgmaildotcom> wrote:
>>I don't want to buy into the above conversation - but I do want to mention >>the book. I read it many many years ago and didn't get it, I suspect. I >>didn't enjoy it, at least, but I can't actually remember why. (It was a >>long >>time ago and I was very young).
> If everyone liked every book we'd be on Planet Woopwoop.
>>I tried again, more recently, seeing as it's supposedly a bit of an iconic >>read for motorcyclists - and couldn't even get a quarter of the way >>through - and this time I know why. I found the style of the narrative so >>alienating for some reason that I simply couldn't engage with it, and >>therefore couldn't keep going with it. I felt as if the story was pushing >>me away, and I gave up the fight. I must admit, now I no longer have to >>read/teach for a living, I don't persevere with things that don't engage >>me - life's too short to read stuff I don't enjoy...
> I notice that you're languaging your response to the book from the > point of view that the book is responsible for your reactions to it. > i.e. that the book is "doing it to you", it is "making you" respond a > certain way, it is responsible for your reactions? That's a > victim-mentality mindset, I would argue. Have you ever considered > that your reactions are a result of _your_ stuff - i.e. your values, > your judgements, your expectations, your beliefs, etc., etc., etc. > i.e. the book is not making you feel that way, your stuff is making > you feel that way. A radical concept, I know. :-( Never mind, > I've lost the plot, you know...
Nah, what I'm talking about really and truly is the Reader Response school of Literary Criticism (undoubtedly an unfashionable school in these days of Post-Marxist-Post-Feminist-Postmodern Criticism, but anyway...) I still reckon a reader's response to a text is a perfectly valid response, and all those things you mentioned - values, judgements, etc, come into it. I felt totally alienated by the narrative voice, and, had I been a student of literature at the time, I would've slogged through it and dissected it and annotated all the points of alienation.... the tone, particular scenes, the characters etc etc - but as a common-or-garden reader, I just said "erk, I can't be bothered with this"
>> ...but perhaps one day I'll be in the right frame of mind to attempt >>ZATAOMM again. After reading the comments from Theo and Gerry >>above, perhaps I need to have a fresh look at it...
> Nah. You may never like it. And that's OK too. It's way too > philosophical and "esoteric" for most people. And it is eminently > easy to disagree with much of it. It is a polarising book, i.e. > one's reactions to it tend to be either extremely for or extremely > against.
> I wouldn't argue though that those who are for it are right and those > who are against it are wrong, or vice versa. I think it's a form of > literary snobbery to pull a book to pieces (or praise it). But > there's a lot of that going on these days. Like everyone is lecturer > in literature. What a wank. Pompousness is the new black.
> You either like it or you don't. You either "get" it or you don't. > (generic "you")
> Here endeth the rant... ;-)
> =================
> Onya bike
> Gerry
I still love you Gerry ;-) And I still intend to have another go at ZATAOMM one day.... Just not yet....
>>> On Nov 6, 1:33 pm, Diogenes <cy...@society.sux.ok> wrote: >>>> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 18:51:43 -0800 (PST), theo >>>>> What do you want? Page number references where he says he was/is >>>>> totally mentally unstable? >>>> Yes, I s'pose it _was_ a silly question. I guess what I meant was >>>> that just because one has a certain opinion about the strangeness of >>>> Pirsig, this should not translate into a desire to see him locked up >>>> for life. Perhaps I took you too literally. >>> You certainly did. I would never want to see anyone locked up for >>> life. >> OK, so what did you mean by "Pirsig should never have been released >> from the asylum..."
>>> In the case of Pirsig I feel that because he was part of the >>> inteligensia and because of the stigma atached to mental illness and >>> breakdown he was allowed to go out and "heal himself" with solitude >>> rather than be given the help he appeared, to me, to desperately need. >>> On a couple of occassions he stopped in the shade of a tree for a >>> whole day. That may seem very Zen but he just didn't know what to do >>> next. >> Are you saying he should have been kept in and doped up on >> "medications"? Back then they loved administering tricyclics a crude >> form of ECT? Do you know what these do to people's mental and >> neurological processes?
>>>> There seems to be a Dutch/German cultural legacy which would encourage >>>> people to lock up anyone who does not see the world in the same way as >>>> they do. I think it's time this trait was made redundant or at least >>>> exposed for what it is - arrogantly dictatorial. >>> Are you serious or just being racist? >> It's an observation. Make of it what you will.
>>> The Dutch had one of the first European governments to have a parliament. >> So? I was talking about observable traits in the Dutch and German >> cultures. Where does it say that such people might not form an >> assembly the call a "parliament"?
>>>>> His 'trip' was escapism from his own mind and from the portion of the >>>>> world he had previously lived in. >>>> Your opinion is noted, but not necessarily given the same weight as >>>> anything resembling an absolute truth. >>> Of course not, your impressions are obviously different. That doesn't >>> necessarily make mine invalid, or your's incorrect. >> I'm glad to hear that.
>>>>> Just because it has the word Motorcycle in the title and was lauded by >>>>> self-appraised critics who have probably never even sat on a bicycle >>>>> doesn't mean I, or anybody else, can't see the book for the drivel it >>>>> really was. >>>> Well, Theo, that piece of fallacious reasoning nicely invalidates and >>>> dismisses anyone who disagrees with your appraisal of the book. >>>> How very Dutch of you... >>>> See, Theo, the thing that gets me is that it's not just your opinion, >>>> it's that you are so arrgantly conviced of the absolute truth of your >>>> opinion that you feel the need to invaidate and deride anyone who >>>> differs with you. >>> Geez you're a tight-arsed wanker Gerry. Unpucker those cheeks. >> There you go again.
>>>> And you wonder why I take great delight in parody-ing this type of >>>> mindset in this newsgroup? >>> ROTFL. >>>>> But hey, that's just my opinion, he may be the guru on the >>>>> rusty 250 Honda you were searching for. >>>> He was on a Beemer, >>> I thought you said you read the book several times? It was a small >>> Honda, as evidenced by several occassions where he was forced to stop >>> because of headwinds causing the bike to overheat. >> Since my mental crack-up in 1997 my memory gets a bit funny on >> occasions. I got mixed up about which bike was whose. It's been a >> long time since I've read the book. As with movies, I often forget >> most of the story's details soon after. But a general impression >> about its quality stays with me. Hence I know whether I thought a >> story was great or awful. I thought ZATAOMM was brilliant. >> Apparently, according to some Dutchmen this makes me of dubious >> character. Fuck you.
>>>> He wasn't and I wasn't looking for a gury, and he's not it >>>> anyway. As I said, you're not just dismissive of his book, you're >>>> dismissive of anyone who sees any merit in the book. How very Dutch >>>> of you. >>> How very racist of you. >> Yes, innit? ;-) Don't you just love it when you're on the >> receiving end of stereotyping for a change? Happy-making, innit?
>> Go kill yourself.
>> =================
>> Onya bike
>> Gerry
> I don't want to buy into the above conversation - but I do want to mention > the book. I read it many many years ago and didn't get it, I suspect. I > didn't enjoy it, at least, but I can't actually remember why. (It was a long > time ago and I was very young).
> I tried again, more recently, seeing as it's supposedly a bit of an iconic > read for motorcyclists - and couldn't even get a quarter of the way > through - and this time I know why. I found the style of the narrative so > alienating for some reason that I simply couldn't engage with it, and > therefore couldn't keep going with it. I felt as if the story was pushing > me away, and I gave up the fight. I must admit, now I no longer have to > read/teach for a living, I don't persevere with things that don't engage > me - life's too short to read stuff I don't enjoy - but perhaps one day I'll > be in the right frame of mind to attempt ZATAOMM again. After reading the > comments from Theo and Gerry above, perhaps I need to have a fresh look at > it...
I wouldn't bother Betty. Gerry is the only person I have ever heard who had anything good to say about that book. Everyone else says it's shit. That doesn't mean you have to have the same opinion just because they do, but there's probably a lot of truth in it, particularly demonstrated by the fact that it is contrary to Gerry's opinion. Never read that book, or even contemplated reading it myself.
|
