Litwit Lounge discussion

Thanks to Rhonda for suggesting this "inaugural" topic for discussion. :)

Rhonda said: "...value systems have a way of being skewed when there is something serious at stake. Nevertheless, as tempted as I am to ask about the advantages of fresh lime juice in a Margarita, I found an interesting quote which I think might provide an inaugural discussion.

Admiration for a quality or an art can be so strong that it deters us from striving to possess it. In some way, at least, one would think that admiration for a quality or art would be strong enough to ensure that one DID do everything he or she could to possess it. Perhaps that desire is simply what keeps us away from it.

Any ideas as to whether this is true or not? Concrete examples will help the argument.

Admiration for a quality or an art can be so strong that it deters us from striving to possess it.

When you speak of quality, do you mean a quality showing a specific characteristic? perhaps something we might admire in a well-known person?

Reggia wrote: " When you speak of quality, do you mean a quality showing a specific characteristic? perhaps somet..."

I think it quite probable that we should associate the admired quality with a person or group of people having it, as opposed to some sort of vague abstraction. In this way, perhaps I might admire and even emulate a writer, painter, or other sort of artist. For example, I admire Flannery O'Connor a great deal. While I confess that I have never attempted to duplicate her art form exactly, others have mentioned a vague similarity in my short stories. This of course is very flattering.
The real question about this quote, and I purposely left off the attribution so that discussion wouldn't be moved in a particular direction, is whether in striving for the ideal or quality which we see in something else, don't we, in fact, make a new thing out of it regardless of our best of intentions? In my estimation, one cannot duplicate a quality in a person or a civilization, without creating a completely new thing. Thus I would argue that art can only be understood in regard to the circumstances and history in which it was created.
On the other hand, perhaps one meaning of the quote is simply that we often hold such a thing in adoration and reverence that we never acknowledge its inclusion into our life. In this I am thinking of that famous discussion by Ayn Rand about Howard Roark and his failure to pay homage to the Parthenon.

As I tried to indicate above, I think this quality or art is associated with a person or group of people who might have it. If you wish concrete examples, consider early Greek tragedy or a political system such as the Roman Republic or even 19th century French Impressionists.
Nietzsche (the author of this quote) was indicating that too often we hold ideals up in the air and this adulation keeps us from achieving the same ends we may only admire. Instead of making those ideals real,we are often satisfied to keep some things as unrealized, probably because it takes too much effort tomake them happen.

Rhonda wrote: "...Nietzsche (the author of this quote) was indicating that too often we hold ideals up in the air and this adulation keeps us from achieving the same ends we may only admire. Instead of making those ideals real,we are often satisfied to keep some things as unrealized, probably because it takes too much effort tomake them happen."

Perhaps this can be summed as perfectionism. That is what prevented me from refinishing the French antique headboard that was in my garage for the past 3 years. It is finally upstairs installed to my bedframe, less than perfect, but pretty enough. Complete? No. Whatever, I guess.