My feelings on description and topics in the novel

     These next two chapters sparked my interest in the way it brought about different topics. First, I was impressed that each place had a different feel to it, and that is how the narrator knew where they were. There was a strange feeling in the western town and an empty feeling in the reservation. The way that the feeling was described was interesting because although I have not experienced those specific emotions in those specific locations, I could relate how every town has its own feel. Just leaving Miami, there is a completely different feel and new environment and culture that affect that feel.

     I was also very intrigued by the comparison between classical and romantic understanding. I believe that it is true, people can see things as they appear or the underlying form of it. Although one understanding can dominate another, I believe that everything can contain both understandings. I think you have to use romantic understanding to be able to analyze with classic understanding. I do not think that each person is one or the other. That would be considering the situation in black and white. The narrator gives a good example with motorcycles. Riding may be romantic, but the maintenance is classic. After this point in chapter 6, the narrator became more in depth with the actual maintenance of motorcycles, sometimes more metaphorical. I found myself re-reading those parts, most likely because it is not something I am interested in, which coincides with the romantic understanding relating to femininity in European cultures. It bothered me that I could make this part of the book true, because of the fact that women can analyze and not have to include feelings. It really is not a necessary association, as the novel states.

Issues Between Friends and Family (Priya Dhairyawan)

This week's reading made me further realize that there seems to be some mild tension or a lack of a connection between the narrator and the three other central characters, Chris, John, and Sylvia. Chris always seems a bit uninterested in the things his father enjoys. For example, the narrator says, " all that moving water is strange, banked by grass hills that hardly get any water at all. I turn around and glance at Chris but he doesn't seem to be particularly interested in it" (44). Small things that evoke curiosity in the narrator do not faze his son. Also, the narrator gets a little bit upset whenever his son asks questions. I understand that constant streams of questions can get annoying, but he seems to always be aggravated even at the first few questions. Similarly, there seems to be the same problem with John. The two men, though they do share a love for motorcycles, have little in common. The issue can be seen with the soda can and the shim. The narrator is quite impressed and satisfied with his unique idea to use part of the smooth soda can to fix John's motorcycle handle, but the thought goes unnoticed by John. Although the two are friends, they have many differences. On another note, I had been wondering about the mother since the beginning of the story. After the mention of Chris's mental illness, it is revealed that this is the reason the wife is not present. I can't help but wonder more about her. There is very little said about her and I am curious as to whether or not this has any significance. 

Fatherhood

I can gather that this book holds many teachings for its reader. Not that it forces these teachings down your throat, but it presents them in such a way that coaxes your thoughts into teaching them to yourself. I feel this way when I read about the relationship between the narrator and his son. Aside from the occasional philosophical ranting on the narrators part, the reader can learn a few things when the narrator himself learns, in this case, how to react to his son. He complains about his son being too curious, too intuitive, to the point that it drives him mad sometimes. But you can't blame the kid for being a kid. The narrator has brief moments of reflection over his demeanor towards his son, and alters his approaches, which is amiable. It was heartwarming to see him modify his philosophy over ghosts and the ghosts of science when his son gave his input- in fact, he would have never developed this philosophy were it not for his son's questioning, so even he has to appreciate it. The narrator grows as a father just as much as his son grows as a person, and to watch them grow alongside each other and learn from each other's philosophies is lovely. I admire watching the narrator grow as a person because this book, aside from being an exploration in philosophy, is still, in short, a book. Any story must have characters that experience growth and change throughout it. The fact that this book successfully does both makes it a better novel altogether, thus far.

Thoughts on the Narrator’s Discussion on the Existence of Things (Monica Rodriguez)

“Do you believe in ghosts?” It seems like a fairly easy question for an adult to address. One would expect a simple answer, especially when such a question comes from an eleven-year-old child, and the narrator does give a simple answer. The issue I have with him is that after giving an acceptable answer the narrator takes his thought process a bit far. He goes from saying that ghosts are unscientific to questioning the existence of science itself, leading the conversation to a brand new territory that could easily entrap the mind. A territory in which we must face the question of whether everything we learn is real or a consequence of the human mind. I honestly think that in bringing up this question of existence the narrator is being quite dense, and annoyingly so. It is not to say that the subject should not be broached, although I personally prefer not to because it just leads to staying up late thinking in circles, I just don’t think it was the appropriate time to bring it up. That is not how you answer a question about ghosts in a normal converstion because with his reasoning, nearly any question about anything could be answered with the question of whether anything really exists (and now I am writing in circles). I do not believe that this line of thinking is really productive, because an answer will not be found. Bringing it up in everyday conversation will only serve to confuse those who hear it, just as confuses the person who thinks of it. 

Initial thoughts of the novel vs. current thoughts of the novel

     When I began to read this novel, I had the sense that I would not be able to relate to it. I thought motorcycles?  They are something I barely know about. And Zen related to the art of motorcycle. I decided to look up Zen after reading the next two chapters of the novel. I found out that it is a type of Buddhism that involves meditation and knowledge is found when there are no desires. This gave me a different outlook on the novel. The narrator is able to feel relaxed and find out new things about him because of his motorcycle. Whether it is fixing it himself, his frustrations trying to get it fixed, or riding, new ideas are sparked. 

     The author also plays a factor in how relatable it is. It has turned out that I feel as I am reading that I am in the novel, riding alongside the characters on their motorcycles. The description of the setting and the way that a storm is coming and the lightning hits the farmhouse are clear images in my head. Imagery aside, it is relatable through the actions the author has incorporated. In the first two chapters, I was able to relate John and how he would rather have an expert fix his car, while the narrator would like to fix it himself and make sure it was done correctly. I believe I have this view because I would not know if it really was done correctly. In these chapters, it was also relatable to how John and Sylvia did not want to ride in the cold. Who would?

Imagery and Defining Characters (Priya Dhairyawan)

One of the most successful aspects of the book so far, in my opinion, is Robert Pirsig's ability to write in a way that allows the reader to feel present in each scene. I feel as though I am watching each scene as it is occurring. The imagery that Pirsig uses contributes to this sensation. For instance, he mentions that "the prairie here is huge but above it the hugeness of this ominous grey mass ready to descend is frightening" (25). His specific diction clearly evokes the sense of a storm coming, allowing the reader to relate to the characters. Also, the situations and reactions that occur seem relatable for readers, specifically when John and Sylvia are upset about having to drive in the freezing cold. Their anger is understandable for readers. Pirsig also uses specific diction here in order to evoke the senses. He talks about how the narrator's worn-out gloves are stiff from the cold, which gives the reader a better sense of how cold it truly is. In addition, I can relate to Sylvia’s fascination with the narrator’s constant flow of ideas when talking about ghosts and their relation to science. This occurrence reminds me of several instances when I have been amazed by one’s ideas that have sometimes gone slightly over my head.

Another thing that Pirsig is successful with is defining and characterizing the people in the book. One character that stands out to me is the narrator’s son, Chris. The author is able to capture his youth and curiosity with his constant stream of questions and his desire to hear ghost stories. Chris adds an innocent and youthful sense to the story. Chris’s floods of questions and his father’s attempts to suppress them provide a good aspect of reality for the story.

Our Everyday Ghosts (Zane Mandell)

I was very intrigued by the conversation that the speaker had with John, Sylvia, and Chris on the subject of ghosts. I had never thought of the concept of a ghost as being anything besides a spirit. The way a ghost is presented by the speaker is anything that can only be seen by the mind. There are many facets that intrigued me on this subject; the Native American style ghost, scientific ghosts, and the issue of true existence. The way that the speaker approaches these subjects of the mind is with such ease and understanding, that it is easy for me to see what the speaker is getting at.

But my interest shifted very quickly when this Phaedrus character is mentioned by the speaker. At this point there is really no way to point out who or what this character is or was, but one thing is for sure: Phaedrus is haunting the speaker in a ghostlike fashion. The speaker attributes Phaedrus to the thoughts he has on the idea of a ghost, creating a complexity that cannot fully be understood by the end of the fourth chapter. I want to know more about who this Phaedrus is. Is this potentially the wife that is nonexistent up until this point in the novel? Or is this someone else, a teacher possibly? I felt that these two chapters truly captured my attention and I cannot wait for what is to come.