Zen End

I did it. All finished.

Since I've sounded rather harsh lately... I should definitely go ahead and say that the book was amazing in that it promotes much thought. Whether I thought the points were right or the narrator was an ass or the methods were wrong... whatever I thought, it was making me think. So. Kudos for that.

As I was rolling through the arguments against Aristotle and dialectic, I found myself more intrigued by the ideas presented than I had for the entire preceding 350 pages. The showdown in the classroom b/t Phaedrus and the teachers was great. And, while I admit my ignorance on the subject, this section certainly felt dialectic to me. Of course, I'm of the evil Church of Reason but, for me, the whole point would have been better made had it actually used the methods of thought it was attempting to discredit.

This "review" piece is going to be a little more haphazard than others...

Nailing down the Greeks as ones who killed a way of thought was pretty damned interesting. Allow me to play the devil's advocate for a moment and pretend that I believe in social Darwinism. It would stand to reason (hah. "reason") that the dominant thought of any given period in time is the dominant thought for a reason. Because it WORKED. And yes, I see an inherent flaw in that line of reasoning. Just b/c something worked 2000 years ok, it doesn't mean that's the best thing for us NOW. Nor does it even mean that it's the best thing upon which we should build our current way of thinking. But that's human nature! Always forward! Yet perhaps we've gone too far ahead without revisiting our past. And perhaps it does need to be done. One little deviation in thought thousands of years ago does, of course, result in a huge deviation between the two resulting lines today. That's obvious and stupid to say.

I like that the narrator did go back before the Greeks tho. Again, back to Ishmael, some of my favorite parts there were the discussions of the assimilation of peoples and thought into the more "dominant" people and thought of the time. It was nice of the narrator to bring that up - even though it was only in passing.

I'm not really sure how to wind up my thoughts about the book. I think that's a testament to how interesting the ideas presented really are. There was no final, "ahhhhh..." feeling when it was over. No real closure or happy ending. It was totally sad to read the afterward. I don't understand why he doesn't mention his other son tho. Even after that jab in the afterward made me realize just how real the story really was, I still had a hard time caring about the actual narrative... the trip. I just really wasn't interested in the relationship b/t the narrator and son. I wasn't interested in whether or not they made it to the ocean, and I didn't care if he sent Chris back on a bus or not. Although the language was very poetic and VERY descriptive, I still never got involved in the story that was being told. I found it distracting and I would have much much rather just read a third-person narrative of Phaedrus's story. I imagine that this style and the process of writing was rather therapeutic for Pirsig, but it didn't really make for engaging reading for me.

All-in-all, I'm glad to have read it. I like the way it made me think about things... as well as the simple fact that it did actually make me think about things. And maybe that was the whole point of it all anyway. Cool.

Thanks, Brooke. Thomas... sorry, man. I should have believed you. I imagine my lack of excitement could be disheartening, but I did find it a very worthwhile read.

Oh. And the one thing I'm sure that I learned? I NEVER want to take a cross-country trip on the BACK of a motorcycle. Never.