4 comments on “Arrive Without Travelling

  1. In response to a number of contacts …. anyone wishing to ask questions, or make observations about the editorial policy of what isn’t incuded in this first DVD in the series should address those to its creator Ant McWatt.

    Comments on the DVD itself, or those items I considered significant enough to the Psybertron agenda to mention in the review above, are of course always welcome, through this comment facility or through personal e-mail if preferred.

  2. Is your decision to publish a review which does not mention the absent Loggins paper (which in many ways defined the conference and arguably the (lack of) direction of the MoQ since) not a classic example of removing text from context, something your friends (of wisdom) are battling so hard against?

    Giving the reader knowledge of what is actually on the DVD without assessing the omissions and values surrounding its conception, execution and production seems to me unwise if one is seeking to enlighten.

  3. VERSE (*whiskey*)
    Oh, show *me/us/us* the way to the next *whiskey* bar
    Oh, don’t ask why
    *No/Oh/No*, don’t ask why
    For we must find *the/our/the* next *whiskey* bar
    Or if we don’t find *the/our/the* next *whiskey* bar
    I tell you we must die
    I tell you we must die
    I tell you, I tell you, I tell you we must die

    CHORUS (*whiskey*)
    Oh, Moon of Alabama,
    it’s time to say good-bye
    We’ve lost our good ol’ mama,
    and must have *whiskey*, oh, you know why

    CHORUS (*whiskey*)

    VERSE (*little dollar*)

    CHORUS (*dollar*)
    CHORUS (*dollar*)

    VERSE (*little girl*)
    CHORUS (*little girl*)

    Oh, Moon of Alabama
    it’s time to say auf Wiedersehen
    We’ve lost our good ol’ mama
    and must have little girl, oh, you know why
    You know why
    You know why

  4. Hello everyone

    This is a continuation of the “absolute pitch” analogy, which perhaps Struan
    may be interested in. I do thank you, Struan, for allowing me to advance
    this notion and for your continued interest in it, even though I am
    struggling to understand it myself and so fail to make myself as clear as I
    would wish.

    David B. writes:

    Fred and all Pirsigites: I’m was very psyched to see the letter from
    Pirsig. Its kinda like having a bootleg recording of my favorite band.
    Its not available in stores, you gotta get it from the hard core fans.
    Thanks tons!

    Glove:

    I couldn’t have said it better! Thanks again Fred!

    David B.

    I’ve included the section of Pirsig’s letter with the hope that we can
    discuss it here amongst the Zen-heads. The big pargraph in the middle
    seems the most interesting, where he starts out with “Prior to
    enlightenment…” and ends with “…this phemonenon.” I was startled by
    the phrase “wandering thru the mythos” and his description of the
    “mythos”.

    Mr. Pirsig writes,
    “Making people laugh sympathetically about other people’s disabilities
    is an enormous accomplishment.
    The fact that you are doing so well at it indicates that the phenomena
    that you experienced back in your ‘insane’ days may have been a kind of an
    enlightenment as well as an insanity. The two tend to overlap.
    …Prior to enlightenment there is often a huge opening of the mind to
    the ‘mythos’ which in this case means more than just legends. It means the
    main stream, the whole body of every idea that ever existed or can exist
    which each culture selects from, calling its own selection ‘reality.’ At
    this time there is an abandonment of normal chanels of cultural selectivity
    over thought. The selection goes sort of crazy and you can think of any damn
    thing and think it is real and in a sense it is. When you start wandering in
    this mythos all rules are off and so you can pick up on strange things. I
    think your mind wanderings about me and the ideas in ZMM and Lila probably
    had less to do with me personally than with this phenomenom.
    …Just before entering the University of Chicago… I experienced a
    similar pickup on the film ‘Orpheus’ by Jean Cocteau. I lived inside that
    film and it had the same sort of effect on me that my book seems to have had
    on you.
    …I’m certainly proud that ZMM has had a similar fuction for you and
    that you are a part of the crowd of people working to diminish the misery of
    the world rather than add to it or just ignore it. As I’m sure you know,
    it’s not as easy as it may look.”

    David:

    I’d especially like to focus in on the notion that cultures select their
    finite reality from the mythos. Pirsig seems to be implying that there
    is one mythos from shich every culture on Earth is a derivative; that
    the mythos is much larger than any given individual culture.
    Fascinating, no? Further, Pirsig says “At this time there is an
    abandonment of normal channels of cultural selectivity over thought.”
    Which brings me to my question…

    WHAT ARE THESE NORMAL CHANNELS OF CULTURAL SELECTIVITY?
    This is not rhetorical. I really don’t know.

    Glove:

    I believe that this has a direct bearing on my “absolute pitch” analogy
    which I have been struggling to come to grips with and share with others. It
    seems to me that the “normal channels of cultural selectivity” are relative
    in nature, depending upon whatever cultural one happens to be immersed in.
    When Pirsig speaks of the “mythos” he is no longer speaking in a relative
    manner, but rather in an absolute, all-prevading manner.

    When he says: “…Prior to enlightenment there is often a huge opening of
    the mind to
    the ‘mythos’ which in this case means more than just legends” he is speaking
    of directly perceiving that which is normally filtered through normal
    (relative) cultural terms, much as those certain rare individuals are able
    to perceive absolute pitch in music. I think the key words here are “opening
    of the mind”.

    This is something that just happens when an individual experiences
    enlightenment, just as absolute pitch just happens, leading to the
    naturalistic notion that only those individuals who are “pre-wired” for the
    experience will indeed experience absolute pitch or enlightenment. The rest
    of us will only be able to listen to those individuals stories of those
    experiences and never actually experience them.

    But everything is much more complex than that. What is “it” that does this
    “pre-wiring”? If we accept the premiss that certain individuals are simply
    born with this ability, do we not also have to accept the premiss that
    experience itself is what pre-wires our attention to certain experiences?
    This is the Buddhist Dharma, the living moment affecting both past and
    future in an ever regenerating fashion. Nothing is set in stone, not even
    stone.

    We do not start out wishing to experience absolute pitch. Ah, but many start
    out wishing to experience enlightenment. Yet curiously, the more one wishes
    to experience enlightenment, the further away it gets. And sound seems
    intrinsically linked to enlightenment… the pure sound of absolute pitch…
    where suddenly “things” just “are” and no longer “are like”.

    I think that this is why Pirsig says: “…I’m certainly proud that ZMM has
    had a similar fuction for you and
    that you are a part of the crowd of people working to diminish the misery of
    the world rather than add to it or just ignore it. As I’m sure you know,
    it’s not as easy as it may look.”

    Perhaps just by opening our minds to the possibilities, we are all “working
    to diminish the misery of the world” by recognizing our own true natures,
    and the Quality that we call experience simply flows through in some direct
    fashion, each in our own unique style. And “it” is never as easy as it
    looks.

    Many best wishes to all,

    glove

Leave a Reply