Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.52 AVERAGE
3.52 AVERAGE
DNF @ 60%
A concerning number of negative reviews on this website take pains to pre-empt the inevitable with a hasty "I know, I'm just dumb, my brain can't handle this". That's to be expected on a website with comments, I suppose, but here's the thing: it's not just assholes in the comments section. It's this book. It pulls off quite an astonishing magic trick; it's not saying anything very interesting or special, but it delivers all that nothing with a pure arrogance that makes the reader feel the author must be saying something true and profound, and then - here's the really clever part - it manages to pretend that it's not remotely arrogant, which leaves the reader feeling that oh, they must just be missing the point.
You're not missing the point, reader. You're just not bamboozled by his sleight of hand.
Pirsig seems just so unassuming, doesn't he? A middle aged hippie washout with a love for nature and a down-to-earth practicality that doesn't allow ego to get in the way of, say, using aluminium cans for motorcycle parts. Sure, he has a tendency to ramble on about his philosophical nonsense once in a while, but allow a man his eccentricities. He's as disparaging about them as anyone.
Except that's just window dressing. Look at the meat of it: repeatedly, he holds court to an audience of gawking onlookers who will never come close to understanding what he's saying. If Jesus had written his own gospel, this is what it would have been like.
Even in his dressed-up fantasy of humility, he can't help himself. He'll start explaining things simply, then after one polite question too many from his captive audience, he'll let rip and make all the obscure references and fancy suppositions he feels like and the mask will have slipped entirely.
One chapter begins like this:
"You’re not very brave, are you?" Chris says.
"No," I answer, and pull the rind of a slice of salami between my teeth to remove the meat. "But you’d be astonished at how smart I am."
Tongue-in-cheek? Sure. Except not really. Never really.
As a plus, I really enjoyed the parts where he was travelling about with his son, though it got quite wearying reading about how he constantly knew better than his friends and they never believed him but he was always proven right. The split personality thing was interesting enough to keep me going for a little while, but in the end, I think I'll read about it on Wikipedia. I usually love, love, love reading about experts in foreign concepts talking about their passions, but the motorcycle talk could only carry me so far, it being more a vehicle for more of his odd philosophy.
I suspect a lot of that philosophy is built on things that most laypeople don't understand and therefore cannot fact-check. What little I knew about was fairly hit-and-miss. For all his talk about technology, he seemed not to know much about how computers work or what they're capable of (or not, more pressingly). A few times he veered dangerously into that woo talking point of "science is actually teaching us that there are no rules!" or whatever they might say to justify utter nonsense. Even his little diversion into the number zero seemed to miss the mark entirely:
"He used the number zero as a starter. Zero, originally a Hindu number, was introduced to the West by the Arabs during the Middle Ages and was unknown to the ancient Greeks and Romans. How was that? he wondered. Had nature so subtly hidden zero that all the Greeks and all the Romans...millions of them...couldn’t find it? One would normally think that zero is right out there in the open for everyone to see. He showed the absurdity of trying to derive zero from any form of mass-energy, and then asked, rhetorically, if that meant the number zero was "unscientific." If so, did that mean that digital computers, which function exclusively in terms of ones and zeros, should be limited to just ones for scientific work? No trouble finding the absurdity here."
I mean... what? Zero as a mathematical symbol didn't exist to those people, but they knew what "nothing" was. The concept WAS out there in the open. Also, we write down binary processing as a series of zeros and ones, but that's just a symbol. Computers don't actually *know* what a zero is. Just like "nothing" existed outside of "zero", so does "off" exist in a computer's functioning independent of any understanding of notation. I don't know what he's even trying to say, here, but no matter what it is, he's failing because it's dressed up in wrong nonsense.
I don't doubt that Pirsig is (was?) very, very clever. But he was, possibly by his own design (ie, shutting out dissenting voices), a big fish in a small pond. Even very clever people need other clever people around to tell them when they're talking out of their ass. Otherwise they end up thinking they're the next Jesus.
A concerning number of negative reviews on this website take pains to pre-empt the inevitable with a hasty "I know, I'm just dumb, my brain can't handle this". That's to be expected on a website with comments, I suppose, but here's the thing: it's not just assholes in the comments section. It's this book. It pulls off quite an astonishing magic trick; it's not saying anything very interesting or special, but it delivers all that nothing with a pure arrogance that makes the reader feel the author must be saying something true and profound, and then - here's the really clever part - it manages to pretend that it's not remotely arrogant, which leaves the reader feeling that oh, they must just be missing the point.
You're not missing the point, reader. You're just not bamboozled by his sleight of hand.
Pirsig seems just so unassuming, doesn't he? A middle aged hippie washout with a love for nature and a down-to-earth practicality that doesn't allow ego to get in the way of, say, using aluminium cans for motorcycle parts. Sure, he has a tendency to ramble on about his philosophical nonsense once in a while, but allow a man his eccentricities. He's as disparaging about them as anyone.
Except that's just window dressing. Look at the meat of it: repeatedly, he holds court to an audience of gawking onlookers who will never come close to understanding what he's saying. If Jesus had written his own gospel, this is what it would have been like.
Even in his dressed-up fantasy of humility, he can't help himself. He'll start explaining things simply, then after one polite question too many from his captive audience, he'll let rip and make all the obscure references and fancy suppositions he feels like and the mask will have slipped entirely.
One chapter begins like this:
"You’re not very brave, are you?" Chris says.
"No," I answer, and pull the rind of a slice of salami between my teeth to remove the meat. "But you’d be astonished at how smart I am."
Tongue-in-cheek? Sure. Except not really. Never really.
As a plus, I really enjoyed the parts where he was travelling about with his son, though it got quite wearying reading about how he constantly knew better than his friends and they never believed him but he was always proven right. The split personality thing was interesting enough to keep me going for a little while, but in the end, I think I'll read about it on Wikipedia. I usually love, love, love reading about experts in foreign concepts talking about their passions, but the motorcycle talk could only carry me so far, it being more a vehicle for more of his odd philosophy.
I suspect a lot of that philosophy is built on things that most laypeople don't understand and therefore cannot fact-check. What little I knew about was fairly hit-and-miss. For all his talk about technology, he seemed not to know much about how computers work or what they're capable of (or not, more pressingly). A few times he veered dangerously into that woo talking point of "science is actually teaching us that there are no rules!" or whatever they might say to justify utter nonsense. Even his little diversion into the number zero seemed to miss the mark entirely:
"He used the number zero as a starter. Zero, originally a Hindu number, was introduced to the West by the Arabs during the Middle Ages and was unknown to the ancient Greeks and Romans. How was that? he wondered. Had nature so subtly hidden zero that all the Greeks and all the Romans...millions of them...couldn’t find it? One would normally think that zero is right out there in the open for everyone to see. He showed the absurdity of trying to derive zero from any form of mass-energy, and then asked, rhetorically, if that meant the number zero was "unscientific." If so, did that mean that digital computers, which function exclusively in terms of ones and zeros, should be limited to just ones for scientific work? No trouble finding the absurdity here."
I mean... what? Zero as a mathematical symbol didn't exist to those people, but they knew what "nothing" was. The concept WAS out there in the open. Also, we write down binary processing as a series of zeros and ones, but that's just a symbol. Computers don't actually *know* what a zero is. Just like "nothing" existed outside of "zero", so does "off" exist in a computer's functioning independent of any understanding of notation. I don't know what he's even trying to say, here, but no matter what it is, he's failing because it's dressed up in wrong nonsense.
I don't doubt that Pirsig is (was?) very, very clever. But he was, possibly by his own design (ie, shutting out dissenting voices), a big fish in a small pond. Even very clever people need other clever people around to tell them when they're talking out of their ass. Otherwise they end up thinking they're the next Jesus.
reflective
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Yes
Loveable characters:
Complicated
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
I guess I'm an Aristotelian thinker because I found Pirsig's arguments in favor of the absolute Quality or absolute good completely unconvincing. I'm not sure what kind of world he would prefer to the one we have, what the pursuit of excellence or quality or absolute good would look like. I do not believe that we all have the same understand of Quality or Good or Excellence. What I value is not going to be what you value, his experiments on his students notwithstanding. His answer to that criticism is unconvincing. He says that there are cultural differences or differences of experience that could lead to a difference of perception of Quality. But doesn't that then mean that perception of Quality IS subjective? If perception of Quality or Good or Excellence is subjective, then how can we all strive for that or know that we have achieved it? It is an interesting idea to tell everyone to find one thing they can do really well (or obsessively as he is about the motorcycle machining his own parts for Christ's sake), but I don't think that really advances the cause of mankind much.
This seems to me to be the story of a mentally ill man with Aspergers maybe, manic depression definitely, and his son who sounds like he's on the spectrum. Portions of the book sound like child abuse.
I don't know why people liked the book so much. It is full of truisms and cranky folky wisdom. Why don't people have any gumption any more? why is everyone so impatient? Why doesn't anybody care about Quality or Excellence or the Good? what's the matter with everybody anyway?
There are good parts to the book. He thinks deeply and some of the questions he raises are worth thinking about. I guess it's worth taking his little test to see if you are a Platonist or an Aristotelian although I have always disliked Plato so I can't say I was surprised by the result. I can't say I'm sorry I read it, but much of it was just plain boring. The motorcycle maintenance for example. couldn't that have been cut down? Did we have to be beat over the head with the analogy?
The best parts of the book were the saddest. Besides the description of the countryside they traveled and the very sad conversations with his son, I most enjoyed the dreams and the character of Phaedra, even though that was the tragedy. His need for validation and to win (talk about egotism by the way which he deplores in his son) in the classroom led to his downfall. Honestly I am going to have read some reviews where people liked this book, because I am sincerely glad to be done with it forever.
This seems to me to be the story of a mentally ill man with Aspergers maybe, manic depression definitely, and his son who sounds like he's on the spectrum. Portions of the book sound like child abuse.
I don't know why people liked the book so much. It is full of truisms and cranky folky wisdom. Why don't people have any gumption any more? why is everyone so impatient? Why doesn't anybody care about Quality or Excellence or the Good? what's the matter with everybody anyway?
There are good parts to the book. He thinks deeply and some of the questions he raises are worth thinking about. I guess it's worth taking his little test to see if you are a Platonist or an Aristotelian although I have always disliked Plato so I can't say I was surprised by the result. I can't say I'm sorry I read it, but much of it was just plain boring. The motorcycle maintenance for example. couldn't that have been cut down? Did we have to be beat over the head with the analogy?
The best parts of the book were the saddest. Besides the description of the countryside they traveled and the very sad conversations with his son, I most enjoyed the dreams and the character of Phaedra, even though that was the tragedy. His need for validation and to win (talk about egotism by the way which he deplores in his son) in the classroom led to his downfall. Honestly I am going to have read some reviews where people liked this book, because I am sincerely glad to be done with it forever.
I really wanted to like this book, but just couldn't get into it.
Couldn’t finish it. I sincerely tried and got 47% of the way through but called time of death on this book because life is too short.
This book has little about motorcycle maintenance, or zen. That said, I enjoyed the philosophical discussion. This book is dense, and benefits from a reread.
This was on my shelf in the Danish edition since the early 80's. But, truth be told, I don't think I ever made it beyond the first 30 pages. This time I made it through and re-listened to paragraphs and chapters several times. I simply loved the chapter about "Gumption".
I've long ago established that novels from previous centuries that are still "known" are known for a reason, namely the simple that they hold up! Most novels from 50 years ago are long forgotten, but the ones that are still reprinted and talked about are mostly good. This one too. In fact, it's more timeless than most.
Pirsig talks a lot about 'technology', and obviously he doesn't mean the same we mean when we talk about technology. Interestingly, he could just as well!
The book is mainly about the search for a definition of 'Quality'. He finds it - or maybe not, but it's a very interesting journey and he forces us to think about a word that we use often without really thinking too much about it. Always a good thing!
Anmeldelse pĂĄ dansk her: http://labeet.dk/boeger/aristoteles-og-motorcyklen/
I've long ago established that novels from previous centuries that are still "known" are known for a reason, namely the simple that they hold up! Most novels from 50 years ago are long forgotten, but the ones that are still reprinted and talked about are mostly good. This one too. In fact, it's more timeless than most.
Pirsig talks a lot about 'technology', and obviously he doesn't mean the same we mean when we talk about technology. Interestingly, he could just as well!
The book is mainly about the search for a definition of 'Quality'. He finds it - or maybe not, but it's a very interesting journey and he forces us to think about a word that we use often without really thinking too much about it. Always a good thing!
Anmeldelse pĂĄ dansk her: http://labeet.dk/boeger/aristoteles-og-motorcyklen/