Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry into Values (P.S.)

• #1 in Best Motorcycles Books

530 Reviews

Sort by: Most Helpful ▲ Date Rating

In my (1/e)*100 years on this planet, during which I devoured at least ten times as many books, I have read only two more than once - "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" is one of them. In this monumental 1974 work, Robert Pirsig has achieved what few others have managed before him and, to the best of my knowledge, nobody else has accomplished since: a perfect unification of philosophy, adventure and mystery. His "Chautauqua," or traveling tale, takes the reader on a profound tour of ancient Greek philosophy, the steppes of Montana, and even a little bit of Zen Buddhism, with endless surprises and much original if not truly inspired thought along the way. Through his self-portrayal by means of the unforgettable and eerily enigmatic character Phaedrus, Mr. Pirsig shares his far-reaching search for the meaning of life, and himself. His fundamental concern is with the following seemingly simple but in effect infinitely complex question: "How can one distinguish "good" from "bad?" The question is posed and addressed in many different forms throughout the book, and in the process the concepts of truth, value and quality are dissected, reassembled, and again dissected and reassembled many times. Mr. Pirsig has an uncanny sense of timing, and he never allows the heavier passages to labor on too long. This is avoided by craftily interspersing his philosophical discourse amongst very down-to-earth and charming observations made during a motorcycle trip that takes the narrator and his seemingly troubled son Chris from the American Prairies to the Pacific, and forms the prevalent background for the entire "Chautauqua." "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" is a totally unique creation. Not being one to lend himself easily to corny clichés, I nevertheless believe that this is one book that definitely could dramatically change your life, whether or not you believe in Zen or have ever sat on a motorcycle. If you love somebody, buy them this book

It is a brave reviewer who wades into the flood of praise that has been heaped upon this book over the years with a skeptical note to sound. (Sorry about mixing all those metaphors, but if you like this book you probably won't mind.) A friend of mine recommended this book to me some years ago, telling me that the book was, for him, genuinely inspirational, a feeling that many other reviewers here appear to share. I read it carefully precisely because I care for my friend and wanted to understand him better. But I have to say, in all honesty, that this is one of the worst books I have ever read.

It is not merely that it's pretentious and outlandish--plenty of "philosophical" books fall into those categories--but it is also monumentally boring. It achieves a degree of boringness that remains unmatched by any other book I have read, and I think that if I can honestly boast about anything, I can boast about the number and variety of books I have read. I've read long books, short books, scholarly books, schlocky books, comic books, cookbooks, mystery novels, fantasy novels--you name it, this beats them all in the boredom category. After reading page after interminable page about a meaningless motorcycle drive across Montana and God knows how many other interminable states, interspersed with prurient glimpses into a decaying psyche that winds up imploding in a most anti-climactic way, one begins to count the pages to the end with every page turn.

As a teacher of philosophy I was dismayed to find that many people who claim to be interested in philosophy found this book to be an effective introduction to the topic. It is perhaps no accident that the people who tell me that this was the first "philosophy" book they read, and that it was foundational for them, turn out to be among the least philosophical people I know. Indeed, many of them appear to be ineducable in the subject, a property that I ascribe to having used this book as their introduction to the subject.

I appear to be in the minority in this view, however. I suppose that I must be some sort of philistine or something, but I can find nothing of value here, either philosophically, spiritually, or psychologically. And I still know nothing about maintaining a motorcycle.

I read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance for the first time a couple of years after it was published, when the eye-catching pink paperback cover was new to bookstores (I remember my parents talking about that bold color while we were on our own long trip of some kind). At that time, I was more or less the same age as the son of the book's narrator, Phaedrus, and of course I could not help but interpret the story from the younger man's perspective: this was an adventure story about a cross country trip, a boy learning about his father, an introduction to a life led by beliefs rather than instinct.

Now, as an adult, I see things through Phaedrus' eyes -- which is to say author Robert Persig's eyes, since in terms of concepts (if not geography) it is considered autobiographical -- and I can recognize many of Phaedrus' musings and thoughts as those of a man who is at once confident of and also seeking his place in the world.

The book is best known as a tribute or sequel to Henry David Thoreau's Walden, which Phaedrus refers to at several points. Others have pointed out, for example, that the protagonist's long (and not too interesting) discussion of what he carries in his knapsack recall Mr. Thoreau's own endless lists of the materials used to build his lakeside shack or the seeds he planted for his sustenance.

But there is much more to this book than that. The provocative blend of Eastern and Western thought, the way he generalizes regarding his philosophical predecessors (and gets some things wrong), the conclusions he draws and the way he sometimes fails to follow his own advice -- they blend to create a picture of an intelligent, complex, and flawed character. Not unlike many of the book's readers.

Maybe that is a key to the book's lasting impact -- at least to this point. Like Walden, the book has practically become an icon in the decades since it was published. A quick scan on Amazon reveals dozens of books using the title Zen and the Art of something ... of knitting ... of making a living ... of archery ... of falling in love ... of poker ... of day trading ... even of the actual maintenance of motorcycles.

But unlike Walden, I think the high water mark for Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance has come and gone. It was an interesting and compelling re-read for me -- as it would no doubt be for others -- but as I worked through it I started to realize that much of its appeal was as a philosophical time capsule, a glimpse at a time when the globalization of ideas was still new, when East and West were further apart than they are today. Take that away and most of what is left is an adventure story about a cross country trip, a boy learning about his father, an introduction to a life led by beliefs rather than instinct. And that's not so hard to find elsewhere.

Before reviewing Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, let me mention that most people will either love or hate the book. Few will be indifferent.

Those who will love the book will include those who enjoy philosophy, especially those who are well read in that subject; people who ride and maintain their own motorcycles; readers who are interested in psychology, particularly in terms of the mass hypnosis of social concepts; individuals who are curious about the line we draw between sanity and insanity; and people who want to think about how to deal with troubling personal situations, especially as a parent. As someone who has all of these interests and perspectives, the book fit my needs very well.

Those who will dislike the book are people who like lots of action in their novels, dislike the subjects described above, and who want easy reading. This book is very thick with concepts, ideas, metaphors, and layering which reward careful reading and thought. Most text books are considerably easier to read and understand. Few modern novels are any more difficult to read from an intellectual and emotional perspective.

Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance has several story lines that intertwine to create a synthesis of thought and experience:

- a father and young son take a motorcycle trip from the Midwest to California
- the father has an internal dialogue with himself about what he observes about the people around him and their engagement with life and technology
- the father attempts to reconstruct the ideas and perspective he had before being treated as a mental patient (which treatment destroyed and distorted his memory and personality)
- the father looks at the great philosophers of western and eastern civilization and attempts to integrate their thoughts into an aesthetic built around our ability to know quality when we see and experience it
- the father deals with the incipient signs of mental instability in his son and himself.

The book is almost impossible to characterize, but let me try anyway. Perhaps the closest book to this one is Hermann Hesse's Siddharta. At the same time, there is also a strong flavor of Zen and the Art of Archery. On the Road by Jack Kerouac covers some of the same intellectual and emotional territory. John Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men considers some of the same questions of personal perspective. In terms of challenging the constrictions of society, there is also an element of The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit here.

What is most remarkable about the book is the way that it pinpoints the spiritual vacuum in the pursuit of more and shinier personal items. Unlike many books from this time, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance upholds a concept of nobility and worth connected to pursuing material progress in ways that reflect eliminating low quality and replacing it with high quality. Think of this as being like the joy of craftsmanship, compared to the dullness of the assembly line. By setting high standards, expanding those standards, sharing those standards with others, and inspiring people to experience life more fully, we can move forward spiritually as well as intellectually. The motorcycle maintenance details connect these abstractions back to the practical issues of every day, as we roll along across country with the author and his son dealing with the realities of keeping our bike running where the repair and parts options are very limited.

The book's afterward is particularly interesting, in which Mr. Pirsig opines about why this book has had such great and lasting appeal and tells you what happened after the book ends.

Ultimately, I felt uplifted by the high respect that Mr. Pirsig has for his readers. He takes us very seriously, thinks we are intelligent, and pays us the compliment of believing that we can learn to fundamentally change all of our perspectives and experiences.

After you finish this book (if you decide to read it), I suggest that you think about where you disengaged from the challenges, tasks, and people around you. Then, pick out one area and get deeply involved. As you master that one, take on another. And so on. Soon, you will have new and greater respect for yourself . . . and more rewarding relationships.

Get your hands dirty!

I'm compelled to write this review after browsing the others, because something has to be said about book that isn't being pointed out for someone who is interested in the book for the first time.

At this point, this book can be found on the front table in your local bookstore. Other philosophy books can be found in the philosophy section either collecting dust, or being perused by someone intensely interested in philosophy who is well versed in debates that have gone on for centuries.

I have listened to the author, Robert Pirsig, being interviewed, and it seems that he did, in fact, intend for this book and its premise of "Quality" to be the great, all encompassing philosophy, presented in a straightforward, readable manner. However, despite Pirsig's intention, that is not quite why this book has become so famous.

This book is famous because it fills a perfect niche in that it introduces some very complicated philosophical questions in a form that the common reader will find interesting. Pirsig is attempting to create a practical philosophy and sets the book against the background of actual experience to make the questions he ponders real for the reader.

With that in mind, if you are not clamoring for a debate with someone else who is knowledgable on the ins and outs of Kierkegaard and Spinoza and are simply looking for a readable book that makes a real attempt of answering the big questions in life, this book is for you.

What I find interesting, and somewhat disturbing, is that many choose to deride this book because it doesn't agree with their notions of philosopy, but fail to grasp that the people who are most likely to read this book won't even be at the table to understand their objections to it unless they read it.

Probably no book has ever been more successful in interesting people in philosophy in the first place. So why are people who are interested in the subject eager to send them away because it disagrees with something they read in some banal tome?

Bottom line, if you ran across this book at your local bookshop or had it recommended to you by a friend, you must read it. It is an awesomely thought inspiring book and asks questions you never thought to ask or at least didn't know how to put your finger on. It's both a good novel and a great introduction to philosophy for people who have an interest in greater questions but not all the time to pursue them. I don't think you should worry about the fact that someone with a Masters Degree in Philosophy, or an equivalent knowledge, is bothered by the book. Also, I wouldn't be thrown by the title. The book isn't trying to sell you a newsletter or convert you to any church (despite the use of the phrase "The Church of Reason") and is only using a bit of Zen philosophy as a grounding for its premise.

Pirsig's premise does have a tendency to never be overtly stated, but I believe that he does this because he doesn't want it overly simplified in the way I'm about to do it.

Pirsig's premise is that we live in a world of both the "Classical" and "Romantic" or, as I'll simplify it, "function" and "form", respectively. Pirsig sees the problems in our world as the result of an overemphasis on form, when function is more essential. However, pure "function" has problems of its own. For example, our bodily organs carry out the function of allowing us to live, but one doesn't really desire for our skin to be translucent so we can watch these functions. In fact, we would have a revulsion to such a thing. Therefore, we have a combination of both of "form" and "function"; our organs work very well without our having to see them. This is the desirable state. This desirable state is called "Quality". Good "function" seems to bring about its own desirable "form". May the decorative towel be damned. That's grossly oversimplified, but there it is.

Finally, one shouldn't be thrown off Pirsig's premise by the fact that, quite frankly, he tends to be an impatient father and not very easy to get along with. While reading the book, it becomes apparent that Pirsig is sharing this with us because he is oblivious to it himself. He makes it obvious that he doesn't understand why no one is pondering the philosophical implications of repairing a motorcycle or why his young son isn't arriving at all of the conclusions he is, despite the fact his son is eleven. He seems to be trapped in the context of his own view of the world.

So, if you want to wade your way through all of the pontificating, please take the time to read "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance". If you really, really like it, you'll have to read Pirsig's other book "Lila: An Inquiry Into Morals". Though "Lila" takes a narrative approach that's a bit less readable than "Zen and...", it gives a more comprehensive view of Pirsig's philosophy. Read both. Then you can debate with the philosophy majors.

This is the kind of book that a person who is intelligent but uneducated in philosophy would pick up, read, and be excited and terribly enlightened by. This apparently was the state of many of the "hippies" who read this book when it came out. But for someone who has read Aristotle and Plato and the myriad of others, especially the Greeks, this book can seem almost ridiculously off-center in its generalizations. Whether it is or not, that is for the reader to decide, I suppose.

The narrator is at first likeable, but as the book moves on and his madness becomes evident, you see his character become despicable, self-absorbed, mean, closed-minded, and, well, a hypocrite in a number of ways. This change may be a large part of the appeal of this book as a sort of psychological novel, though I am still not sure whether that is what Pirsig intended it to be.

Despite the disgust and boredom I sometimes felt while reading, the book has a lot of good things to say about living and the self. Most importantly, if you pay enough attention it will definitely get you thinking. Overall, a controversial book, but worth reading if only for the thought and controversy it will provoke within your own mind.

For me this work seems to fall into the category of books that are more disappointing than they otherwise might have been if they did not have the reputation as a `classic.' If I had read it without any prior preconceptions I think that I would have just found it occasionally annoying, occasionally interesting - but largely unexceptional.

Unfortunately though since it is a self-described "modern epic" I was expecting more that self-involved navel-gazing. Sometimes they really are just directions on how to assemble a rotisserie and not a deep symbol of our modern value system... I mean, common - insert A into slot B... *sigh* (if you haven't read the book before just know that yes this is really part of it, I didn't make it up)

To give the book its due though the author's unique perspective does give rise to some interesting points and ideas but these worthwhile nuggets are too few and far apart. Maybe if I was interested in the value of philosophy in and of itself this book would have been of more interest but rather it seems to represent more of a problem that pure philosophy can represent. When ones goes on these journeys of the mind and allow themselves to become so disconnected from reality there ideas loose all practical value - while a rational proof of something may be occasionally interesting, a more important question might be how one brings these abstractions back to the real world.

Finally, any book of this type which seeks to expound `the truth' (or even a truth) always walks a fine line between being interesting and coming off sounding aragonite. This book walks that fine line - and crosses it frequently.

While I did have to roll my eyes every few pages I am still glad I read this work because of its reputation - sometimes finding out a book isn't that great is just as valuable as finding out that a book is good.

I read this book while riding a train from New Mexico to New Jersey, this seemed an appropriate venue given the subject matter. I had meant to read the book for quite some time, I had heard rave reviews from friends, and I believe that the book had even appeared on one summer reading list I had received in high-school.
I was shocked by how bad the book was. First, as a book, it is gramatically a mess. Normally, this would probably be of little import for a "book of ideas", but Robert M. Pirsig was apparently a professor in a university English Department, consequently, he ought to know better.
However, and more importantly, the substantive content of the novel struck me as not only poorly reasoned, but somehow ominous. Mr. Pirsig initially gets stuck (for lack of a better term) on the fact that he cannot define "quality." He refuses to accept that the term quality is refers to an essentialy subjective measurement. Consequently, he searches for an objective definition of quality. Failing he decides to reject the "dichotomy" which would divide the universe into objective and subjective views, and refuses to give the word any definition. He then decides that quality is the meeting of the objective and the subjective, the moment at which out subjective desired meet the objective universe and cause all creation. The Tao, except formed from human desire.
First, "quality" does in fact refer to a subjective characteristic. Something is considered of high quality if it does what the observers want it to do. Second, I do not think that Mr. Pirsig is justified as characterising modern views on the objective and the subjective as a dichotomy. That would imply two equally valid views of the universe. There is in fact only one, the objective, the term subjective refers to the fact that we can see only a small portion of the objective universe, and only from one angle at a time. The subjective view of reality is not a viewpoint that competes with the objective, it is that incomplete portion of the objective universe to which any person had access.
Finally, Mr. Pirsig's definition of quality struck me as ludicrous. I do not believe that there can be a meeting place between human desires and the objective universe, our desires, like we ourselves, are part of the universe, viewed objectively. Further, it seems the height of arrogance to argue that the motive force behind all creation is our subjective desires. Were that true nothing would have been created prior to human beings, and nothing is being created outside the sphere of our influence. Neither is true.
Finally, I found Mr. Pirsig's style extremely grating. In every instance in which a person dared disagree with him, Mr. Pirsig immediately attributed the fracture either to some secret motive, or to the fact that his opponent lacks the intelectual independence to see the truth. The thought never occurs that his detractors may have a point. Ultimately, I do not think Robert Pirsig was interested in any sort ot dialectic, or any forward moving debate, to do so would require he grant creedence to opposing viewpoints. Mr. Pirsig seeks followers.
All in all, I think the book was pedantic, poorly written and poorly thought. Mr. Pirsig's own ego provides to great a road block to allow him to make any serious inquiries into values, or into anything else.

I first read this book in 1975. I particularly appreciated then the concrete illustrations used in the development of Pirsig's philosophy. However, I was not prepared at that time to follow the details of the logic used to develop his main point, namely, that in ancient Greece rationality had unfairly toppled mysticism as a valid source of knowledge.

I always intended to read the book again and finally last month I found an open week, bought a copy of the new 25th anniversary edition, and went at it. The text is unchanged in content but the print is larger and much easier to read than in my old paperback edition. The margins are wider and allow more annotations. It is well worth getting this Anniversary edition.

This time I got much deeper into Pirsig's main premise--the one noted above. Pirsig believes Quality to be the missing element in today's culture, but he says it must be kept undefined so that rationality will not be able to kill it again as it did thousands of years ago.

My major satisfaction from this novel still comes from the unusually perceptive and cleverly-wrought metaphors that Pirsig presents to advance his philosophical arguments. I have so many favorite ones it is difficult to choose among them. For instance, he labels the University as "Church of Reason," indicating it fanatical devotion to rationality at the expense of other values not approachable through rational means. No wonder professors of philosophy feel threatened. Rationality is their bread and butter!

Other illustrations: He compares the experience of looking out of a framed car window with the frameless view you get riding a motorcycle and uses this as an example of breaking down the subject/object boundary. He indicates that his objective is not to deal with "the 'news,' the silt of tomorrow" which accumulates when the river of culture bends, but to try to deepen the channels of "the best" that lies ahead along the river's future course. He likes to follow "an arrow that enlarges sideways in flight" rather then tracking its forward path in order to find "lateral truths" that point to falseness of axioms which prevent hitting the target. He points out that "institutions such as schools, churches, government, and political organizations of every sort all tend to direct thought for ends other than truth, namely, for the perpetuation of their own functions." I have often pondered this telling truth.

Ultimately, he finds Quality to be the uppermost element of the triad of truth--the creator of both subject and object, residing in the interface between the two. His comparison of Quality with the ancient text of the Tao is exhilarating!

The Quality of this novel is extraordinary for me. It exhibits many of the aspects of Quality in writing such as integrity, imagination, flux, continuity, suspense, insight, pathos, and allegory as it attempts to find the missing element in today's technology-dominated world. It is one of the five formative books in my life, and has a place on my "favorites" bookshelf next to Walt Whitman's "Leaves of Grass" and the poems and essays of D.H. Lawrence.

This book is the most impressive, encouraging, moving, inspiring book I have read thus far (I'm 31). It's not difficult. It's just big. It covers a gigantic range. Word up, people...the motorcycle journey is a frame for the interesting stuff, and allows us a short break while we process. They start low, running away. They climb. The climb gets tougher, then tops out with a gods-eye view of NOT the world as in planet Earth, but of life, the universe and everything. Too much for mere mortals such as us puny humans to endure, so what goes up must come down. Reach journey's end, and it's time to turn round and go home. And so the cycle (no double meaning intended) continues. Pirsigs message is, I think, this; the ultimate metaphysical truth is beyond our understanding - that is why it ('Quality') must be held undefined. Pursue it with our feeble mental capacities, and you will be declared insane (that's what happened to Pirsig, he was institutionalised, and got BIG voltage to the frontal lobes). The best advice he can give us after surviving this experience and, incredibly, still being able to write, is use your own judgement - 'What is good, Phaedrus, and what is not good - Need we ask anyone to tell us these things?' Nobody's ideas, notions, beliefs are absolutely true, they are all relatively true; relative to when we are, where we are, who we are. E=mc2.I'm sorry not everybody loves the book, but I cannot tell them they're wrong. Abandon shallow ego goals and open your mind to the sound of one hand clapping. Art & science aren't opposed opposites, they are both useful tools when you understand what they can do. Robert, thank you for your loving gift of this book. You will always live in my heart.

This book was frequently assigned to middle and high-school aged kids when I was growing up, and having finally read it later in life, I can only shudder at the thought of how many kids were turned off to reading, let alone Zen or philosophy by having this book foisted on them.

The book is about nothing so much as a self-absorbed, navel-gazing hippy monster of a father who sees only the worst in his own son as he drags him around the country on the back of his motorcycle in persuit of some sort of psycho/spriritual quest. The tortured internal philosophical ramblings boarder on absolute schizoid nonsense, and offer no usable wisdom for happiness, enlightenment or remotely practical living, thinking or being.

This book's endless pages of densely packed type have been fawned over by slack-jawed English professors for far too long. They are impressed and frightened by it's rambling inscrutability, and then jump on the "Wow! What a powerful and enlightening book!" bandwagon that they see all their peers clinging to. Don't believe the hype.

It reminds me of another piece of New Age trash I read a while back about a woman who left her family and children to persue her 'Zen quest'. Pathetic. These people are more spiritually clueless than anyone, and yet they get bandied about as heroes. The secrets to the wisdom they seek are right in front of them the whole time, and yet they run (in the guise of 'sacrifice' or 'letting go'), and expect the rest of us to applaud and admire them for doing so.

No applause here.

I first read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance as a college senior twenty-five years ago. I remember then being frightened by how this man's determination to pursue a philosophical idea to its conclusion, even if it were against the grain of established conventions of thinking, drove him insane. I was afraid deeper study and questioning might do the same to me. I know now, however, that I'm not insane. I also know that twenty-five years ago this story of a man and his son travelling by motorcycle from Minnesota to the Pacific Ocean took deep residence in my soul.

I've been a teacher now for twenty-three years, long enough to forget some of my initial influences. But, as I read this book all these years later, I realized that my philosophical view points, examples I use to illustrate ideas with my students, what I believe the purpose of an education is, and several other bits of pedagogy and ideology originated in Pirig's story.

I highly recommend this book, maybe especially if you are unread in philosophy and would like a readable, enjoyable, and provocative entree into the history and vocabulary of philosophy.

It's a deeply moving, intellectually stiumlating story. Its devotion to story-telling and philosophical inpuiry is indeed most rare.

This is by far the worst book I ever read...and I made myself read it from cover-to-cover in the forelorn belief that it would redeem itself near the end; it did not. Please do not buy this book -- if you feel tempted, get it from the library first to see if you like it. This book is famous for one reason and one reason only, in my humble opinion,.... it has a very unusual, catchy, interesting name. That's it. That's all it has. It is not really about Zen, or motorcycle maintenance (although both feature fleetingly). The new sub-title "an inquiry into values" is laughable marketing too. It is mainly the self-indulgent ramblings of a very dull, self absorbed person - probably on the edge of a nervous breakdown. The only thing I took away from this book was that I felt rather concerned for the author's son (on the assumption that this book is partially or fully auto-biographical). ...

Robert Pirsig's incredible tour-de-force in this book is literally the intellectual adventure of a lifetime, and one that still leaves me shaking my head in wonder after thirty years and a number of readings of it. I was introduced to "Zen" by my brother in law, who promised me that I would enjoy it. By now I must admit to now having several short quotes from it framed under glass at various spots in the house, because I was so taken by the gravity of what he has to say, and the disarmingly simple way he usually chooses to say it. Pirsig is a man with a lot to say, and a lot of wisdom in what he has to offer.

Although I must admit that I do not agree with certain key aspects of his argument regarding the way the ancient bifurcation between what he calls romantic and classic perceptive orientations can at last be repaired and restored to cognitive and intellectual unity, I stand in utter awe at the quality of mind any human being must have to marshal such a breath-taking effort as this, at the accomplishment of conceiving and articulating the philosophical treatise described in such loving and painstaking detail here. His grasp of such eclectic, obscure and philosophically central notions truly is a feat quite the equal of the ascent of Everest in terms of the levels of concentration, mental endurance, and simple cognitive acumen necessary to muster this kind of argument.

The book works on two levels that both assist and complement each other. First, the story narrative, which he uses both to illustrate ideas he is talking about and to introduce ideas he wants to discuss, also acts to bring us back to "normal everyday reality' after spinning high in the thin cold air of his theorizing. Second, the philosophical story becomes a kind of sophisticated detective story for curious intellectuals, as Pirsig's alter ego, Phaedrus, searches deeper and deeper into the mysteries that once led him into insanity because of the sheer intensity of his efforts to solve the riddle of the difference between the two seemingly irreconcilable aspects of reality (the romantic and the classic).

The book is an awe-inspiring trip into a discovery of the nature of reality, contemporary society, and yourself. It has led to study groups, study guides, and a whole cult of Pirsig watchers who consider him the functional equivalent of the wise seer. The wildly best-selling book also led Pirsig deeper into a life of isolation, eschewing publicity and seeking greater introspection. There is a sequel, called "Lila", which also enjoyed a best-selling run on the charts in the early 1990s. This is a book that is quite unlike anything else you have ever read, and is something you have to experience to understand in its full impact. It is also a book I can recommend with a smile, knowing with confidence you will be glad you finally decided to buy it and read it. Enjoy!

Part road novel, part philosophy, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance ("ZMM") met with huge critical and commercial success when first published in 1974. Narrator and son ride from Minneapolis to San Francisco; meanwhile, both are haunted by the narrator's past insanity, brought about by his "chasing the ghost of rationality". A series of philosophical monologues addresses questions both mundane - how to fix a motorcycle - and metaphysical.

Today ZMM retains a sizeable following, although criticism of it is very polarised: Pirsig's fervent self-assurance when dealing with philosophical questions converts some readers into "followers" and tends to exasperate everyone else. Mostly structured as a "solution" rather than an "inquiry", as the title claims, ZMM's philosophy is too often accepted without question, and it is frequently and regrettably true that the more positive the review, the more philosophically naïve the reviewer. Nonetheless, this should not disallow ZMM from being considered on its own merits.

ZMM is not an introductory philosophy text, more a "once-in-a-lifetime" philosophical statement; the comparison has already been made with Hofstadter's "Gödel, Escher, Bach", and Hofstadter's description - "a statement of my religion" - could well describe ZMM, too. When one considers the motivation required to sustain Pirsig's long and solitary struggle in writing and publishing ZMM, the rhetorical fervour of his arguments becomes more understandable. Those who attack Pirsig as pompous or narcissistic fail to appreciate the degree of self-belief needed to complete such a highly individualistic work. So, we can certainly admire him for trying - but is ZMM any good?

Some of Pirsig's arguments rest uneasily, such as his blithe acceptance of scientific relativism; and in rejecting subject-object dualism, he paints himself into some peculiar corners, such as his disquiet at the lack of beer cans littering Crater Lake National Park. But there is much in ZMM that is good and thought-provoking, too, especially where education is concerned: all teachers should read this book. And even during his tougher metaphysical monologues, only the driest, most rigid mindset could fail to find Pirsig's rhetoric engaging. Here, his wild claims about the importance of his philosophical arguments are gently counterbalanced by his acknowledged previous insanity: Pirsig takes care to label them the "ramblings of a madman", though not without a certain knowing irony.

ZMM is not just philosophy: it is also a fine piece of travel writing, and a history of Pirsig's teaching career. It remains a novel, however, and not an autobiography: whilst the events described did occur, subtle details have been changed. Most importantly, Robert Pirsig "the author" differs from the narrator, who in turn differs from his former personality ("Phaedrus"). The subtle conflict between the narrator's unifying philosophy, and the barely resolved tensions between narrator/Phaedrus and narrator/son, produces a fully intended irony. Criticism of the narrator is unfair and misguided when it is directed at the author.

Pirsig writes with great clarity. Well-structured sentences and careful use of italics give his writing great explanatory power, reminiscent, for this reviewer, of the biologist Richard Dawkins. We may not agree with Pirsig, but we are rarely in any doubt about what he means to say. Nonetheless, there are inevitable uncertainties at the core of ZMM, concerning reason and its limits. The antipsychiatric "insanity as enlightenment" nettle is never fully grasped, though one senses that this is Pirsig's belief; moreover, the analytic intractability of the Eastern philosophy that he embraces means that ultimately, the "inquiry" never reasons its way to an answer. Those seeking an absolutist metaphysical system will not find it here, and one can imagine Pirsig's sense of unease at becoming a latter-day religious guru.

ZMM is very much unique: four and a half years in the writing, but decades, one senses, in the germination. Fans will enjoy the 25 or so extra pages, cut from the original manuscript, available in DiSanto's "Guidebook to ZMM" - but skip the dreadful philosophy chapters. Pirsig wrote a sequel of sorts, "Lila", in 1991, but its sour atmosphere and slack reasoning make it strictly for the converted. Evidently Pirsig coped badly with his post-ZMM fame: one can imagine the sackloads of witless fan-mail. Unquestionably, for this reviewer, ZMM can stand alone: a model of clarity in written argument, a fine American road novel, and an inspiring demonstration of one man's ability to think for himself.

Nothing to do with Zen. Almost nothing to do with motorcycles. And contains more ancient philosophy than a college text.

Some say ZaMM was autobiographical. I hope to God that it wasn't.

I read it over 15 years ago and HATE-HATE-HATED the book!!! Between the seemingly endless volumes of philosophy, that lead character was so haunted by Phraedus and his quest for "good" and "truth" and "beauty" that he never opened his eyes to appreciate the world that motorcycling or life in general was bringing to him. In the first night or two of camping, his son complained of stomach problems. He ignored the kid, "Go take care of it, son" and then casually mentioned to the other couple that "His doctors say it's psychological." No wonder the other couple took off on their own way. The guy was a total A$$ and a BAD FATHER! It was a classic example of how his madness made his entire family dysfunctional, and small wonder he wasn't liked by friends that he tried to make. I slammed that book down several dozen times because I was so angry with him. (But I was determined to finish it.) I won't spoil the end for you, but no wonder THAT happens! And I'm sure the lesson he learned was only temporary... As you can see, he still makes my blood boil.

On a sad note: Robert Pirsig's son, Chris, was stabbed to death in SF, coming out of a Zen temple in 1979. I wish with all my heart that he played a more important role in his father's real life than he did in his book.

Hehe, get the pun in the title there? Riding...writing...no takers? Eh, I thought it was clever, anyway.

You know, reviews on this book tend to sort themselves into two camps, the five stars and the one stars. G'head, look, I'll wait.

Back? Well I gave it three stars. Yeah yeah, I know, "just to be different". Actually, the score isn't what I personally had in mind; I wanted a 5i to keep with the whole theme of reevaluation of standards (5i would be an imaginary number, for all you non-math majors), but a regular three stars is all I can get away with.

The problem I've got is that neither camp seems to understand the underlying point. Those that hate it tend to attack some of the pointedly irrational reasoning as an intellectual cop-out, and then go about logically deconstructing his argument by showing his dialectic errors and yada yada yada. Yes, he makes a logically unsound argument; Pirsig comes right out and says it, and that may very well be a cop-out. But which is worse, the philosopher who retreats into these illogical defenses or his attackers who don't have the balls to follow him and defeat him on his own ground? The way to effectively win a debate is to turn your opponent's argument back upon itself, not to run back to your own incomplete abstractions. Example: don't use words like "substantive" and "subjective" (which Pirsig goes to great pains to redefine) and apply the Webster's definition to them. It's just weak. Someone in one such review said on the dichotomy of subjective and objective that "there is in fact only one, the objective; the subjective refers to the fact that we can only see one portion of the objective universe." First, even in traditional definitions of these terms, this is NOT true. Just go to a crazy house, or better yet, just pay attention the next time you're dreaming; the subjective is EVERYTHING. If it wasn't, you wouldn't be on Amazon writing an opinion because there would be no opinion, only objectivity. Duh. Kant knew this, Freud knew this, and so did everyone before and after them. Second, the very argument proposed is a redefinition of these terms; to go back to the old definitions is to simply miss the point--in other words, language like this basically reduces everything else you've said to absolutely nil.

Now for the five star camp...oh God. "It really changed my life", "it really had an effect on me", "it really breaks down the system", "it's really original"...what did it REALLY do? Honestly, tell me, I'm dying to hear, because the fact of the matter is that most of the stuff contained in the book is derivative. Some people get the credit that they deserve, like Poincare and Thoreau (and if this isn't a sequel to Walden, I don't know what else it could be). However, the most influential thinkers don't. Nietszche broke down the subject/object dichotomy a LONG time ago and in just this fashion, and even took it a step further; he proposed an entire restructuring not just of thought but of grammar. If the divisions between subject and object are artificial, then so are subject and predicate; therefore, as the subject and object are actually one in the same perceptively, then the subject should not be seperated from the actions he/she/it performs--indeed, those predicate actions are what DEFINES the subject, not the other way around. To make my point, get off the soap-box. You honestly do more to make people shy away than to win any converts. I've read little in this book that is actually original, except maybe the part about a man riding his motorcycle. Now THAT is creative.

But for me...sure, I like it. It's been a great read, and the unification of Eastern and Western thought is especially provocative. And whether you like it or not, the fact is that technology has, in some way, caused an alienation in the 20th century in the consumer; Pirsig thought he had an answer, and here it is. Maybe he's wrong, but at least it's a start, and not a wholly bad one either. It's the first time that many concepts (like Zen and Bhudda) have been explained to me in terms that made concrete, relative sense, not just mystic mumbo-jumbo. It tends towards density and boredom sometimes, but I believe Pirsig has a point for this. He invokes Thoreau, who used an extremely similar technique, early on, and in one of my favorite parts elucidates in a VERY tedious manner the various equipment he takes with him on the road, and I couldn't help but be reminded of Thoreau's bean-planting ventures in Walden (especially since Pirsig mentions how boring Thoreau can be right after he's gone on about his knapsack for 5 pages; it's called tongue-in-cheek humor). On the whole, though...just too idealistic, yet again just like Thoreau. But read it for yourself--I do highly recommend it regardless of it's shortcomings--and make your own decision; that's the whole point, not to hear my rant or rave on it.

One final point to make to the detractors. *IF* you're going to argue against this book, it's so simple to do that you look like a moron for not doing it. Pirsig says Quality is self-evident, right? And you say that you don't like the book, right? And an understood point that he makes is that Quality is present in this book. Well by God, then that Quality hasn't made itself self-evident, therefore it isn't present to defend itself, and therefore Pirsig's argument is in ruins. See how easy that was?

(with apologies to Pirandello)

Isn't it lucky that Zen patriarchs tend to be an enlightened lot, with an active sense of humour? If they weren't, I have no doubt they would sue Pirsig for libel. What this book contains is all the froth and gibber that you have to dispose of before you can discover Zen.

People have a habit of saying that books they like 'changed their life', and this book gets a lot of that. Personally, I find that any book worth reading will change my life. This one didn't.

Zen and the Art of Lacklustre Hippiedom has all the philosophical insight of Sophie's World, and all the entertainment value of the Boston Telephone Directory. So yes, I suppose it has some redeeming virtues.

In short, a best seller.

It is with much trepidation that I disagree with the clear majority of readers and at the risk of being considered "a cynical drapchode" (expression in previous review), I think this was one bad book. The book has two three subplots: (1) the author and his son take a motorcycle trip across America (2) the author inquires into the philosophical underpinnings of Western civilization (3) the author goes totally insane his career as a college professor goes into freefall and he must have his personality expunged by court-ordered electroshock treatment. The book is chocked full of whining narcissism and self-involvement. We, the readers, have to be subjected to the author's vendettas against faculty committees, rhapsodies about screws and washers and how they relate to philosophy, and his cutting remarks to and about his son whenever the poor child interrupts (as children often do)his book-length loveletter to himself. This book has been published and republished to continual oohing and ahhing and acclaim and it probably is the duty of every sentient human being to get a copy and read it with an open mind. That being said, I plowed through the second half more from a sense of duty than from any enjoyment, and I really couldn't care less whether the author lived or died.

If you are thinking of reading this book there are some things you should know right off. 1. This is not a book about Buddhism, or Zen. It explores the ways in which eastern philosophies can help western thinkers move toward Quality. 2. This book covers a lot of ground, very quickly and is not a philosophical textbook. If you don't know much about philosophy, this book will not change that fact, but it will make you question a lot of the assumptions you have made. 3. This book will change your life! This book is about Quality. If you have read the Tao Te Ching, you have already read a book which attempts to explain Quality. It is the unnamable, the One. Pirsig asks us to question whether science and logic can really bring us closer to the "Truth." Ever since Socrates began using the dialectic to try to discover Truth, humans have been on a quest to find it. The tool we use is known as scientific method. We have been using scientific method for a long time, and it has given us a lot of useful knowledge. It has not, however, brought us any closer to finding an absolute Truth, which is true for everyone everwhere. Quality is undefinable. It comes before thought, and before actions. Any attempt at describing it is useless, because as soon as you attempt to categorize it, you are only talking about one aspect of it. What Pirsig does in this book, is attempt to show us ways that we can use Quality in our lives. He calls his main character Phaedrus. Which comes from Plato's dialogue by the same name. Reading this dialogue will help you immensely in following the arguments he presents. Don't be fooled by this into thinking that Pirsig is a Platonist. Phaedrus was a Sophist, as is the Phaedrus in this book. Neither the historical Sophists, or Pirsig, buy into Plato's concept of absolute "Truth." If you are at all interested in the ideas of subjectivity and the influence of location (in time and space) as it relates to philosophical, religious and scientific claims, this book will greatly interest you. If you're a "post-modernist" you've probably already read this book, and if not, this book will help you to crystallize a lot of your objections to Modernism. If you feel that the world is becoming more and more empty and hollow, and think that part of your basic humanity has been stolen by alarm clocks, concrete, automobiles, and (can I say it?) computers, this book may help you in finding the Quality that resides within technology, yet is so often ignored by those who wield technology like a biological weapon. If you've ever thought that the whole world was crazy, and want to learn more about what really makes a person "insane," you should know that this book is written from the perspective of an insane man. If you are searching for answers, this book will give you a few more questions, and help you realize that life is about the questions, not the answers!

I read this book as a psychology undergrad at age 20 and thought it was about mental illness. I read it again as a software analyst at age 30 and found that it's about quality, and that it contains relevant, useful, and powerful tools for solving quality problems in the real world.

The alienation with technology that Pirsig addresses is a bigger problem than ever. "Dummies" books are best sellers, and "web sites that suck" is a popular web site. The digital revolution is fraught with real-world quality problems, and Pirsig's metaphysics gives insight to their root causes. His metaphysics is of sound philosophical construct, and that's why it still works decades later.

The book is not about Zen, art, or motorcycles, so please don't mind the title. The protagonist is a rhetorician. The title is a rhetorical tool. Pirsig defines a "classic-romantic split" that explains why we have so many technology products that are more frustrating than useful. He argues that quality can't be found in objects (products) or subjects (critics), which explains why evaluating quality is difficult.

I'm reading it again this summer at age 37, and it's helping me rebuild my world view in response to the changing times, which is the primary useful value of philosophy. Next, I'm going to re-read the sequel, "Lila" which, despite its less interesting plot, has an even better explication of the "metaphysics of quality" than ZAMM.

"Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" is an entire experience in philosophy and spirituality condensed into what I found to be a very thought-provoking anti-novel. It has three main "streams" of thought: the story of the motorcycle-riding narrator and his son, the story of Phaedrus, and the Chautauqua that is the narrator's way of explaining Phaedrus' philosophy.

Though the first two chapters of the narrator's musings are slow to bring the reader into the plot, intriguing mystery elements are revealed by the end of Chapter 3. By this time, the reader should know that Phaedrus spent his whole life searching for a ghost, found the ghost, "thrashed it good," and became one himself. However, the nameless narrator cannot tell Phaedrus' story without also giving the reader a crash-course in history, philosophy, and of course, motorcycle maintenance (through the Chautauqua, of course). I now warn those who cannot bear long lectures about dead historical figures, slippery concepts or technical minutiae to leave this book alone.

Part I of the book is set chiefly in the Dakotas. During this part, the Chautauqua mostly discusses the classical-romantic split in people's thinking. What makes Robert M. Pirsig's discussions unique is how he deftly brings Zen concepts into the reader's understanding of the split.

Part II begins with the narrator's arrival in Montana. It is the reader's first real encounter with Phaedrus (an unforgettable, though hardly endearing, character) and the first introduction to the "ghost" that he so passionately pursued. (The ghost's name: REASON. One of its popular haunts: SCIENTIFIC METHOD.)

Part III takes place during and right after the narrator and his son's hike up a mountain. The chapters in this section are almost entirely devoted to the Chautauqua. The discussion of the ghost of Reason is dropped and a full, in-depth explanation of something outside Reason, Quality, is taken up. Pirsig takes great pains to say how Quality determines our values, creates our mythos and touches our hearts. Those who like taking detours when an interesting topic distracts them will love this part. Those who don't care for such detours and want to get on with the story will find this part long-winded and over-written. (This is their second warning!)

Part IV continues and ends Phaedrus' story as the narrator and his son go through Oregon and California. In the Chautauqua, Quality is joined by Reason once more. The reader finds out how Phaedrus travelled to the University of Chicago, took his philosophical inquiry to its logical end, and finally became a "ghost" himself. His conclusions about what is Real, about what is True, about what is Beautiful, and about what is Best, can prove liberating to anyone who has been independently wondering about them. The ending also contains an interesting twist in the story of the narrator and his son.

I can find connections between the ideas in this novel and those in the essays of Ralph Waldo Emerson, the parables of Kahlil Gibran, the poetry of T. S. Eliot, the books of the Bible, and other great spiritual or philosophical literature that generations have read and shared. (Pirsig even explains the why and how of this phenomenon in the Chautauqua.) To best enjoy this story, the reader must relate to it--or resonate to it.

Pirsig provides a heavy inquiry into the nature of science, philosohpy, quality and pursuit of universal truth in this book. He uses a "scientific method" in describing his inquiry. Being a scientist myself, I found his book disappointing. I was excited in the topics he pursued, but there are some flaws in his reasoning that are hidden in his heavy language --- these flaws amount simply to rhetoric in retrospect. To provide an example of such flaws, consider what Phaedrus, his alter-ego, says about the nature of scientific truths and scientific methods.

Phaedrus postulates that the number of scientific hypotheses to explain a given worldly phenomenon increases with the amount of exploration. As you apply scientific method to test a hypothesis, new hypotheses develop. Thus, Phaedrus feels that all these hypotheses can never be tested because the number to be tested grows at a faster rate with the number being tested. He quotes Einstein to sum this up, to conclude that (scientific) truth is a function of time -- at any given moment, there is one amongst a set of hypotheses that best explains a phenomenon.

But, from here, Phaedrus makes the statement that "the time spans of scientific truths are an inverse function of the intensity of scientific effort". This claim, to me, is unsubstantiated. Phaedrus seems to justify this claim by saying that as
more hypotheses come into existence, the probability that the leading hypothesis (call it the momentary truth referred to by Einstein) is replaced by a new hypothesis is greater because the number of alternatives is greater.

The primary flaw in reasoning is that it ignores that the quality or soundness of the available hypotheses. In other words, they are all equivalent and the probability of one replacing the other are all equal. I prefer to resort to an alternative explanation of this phenomenon. Let an n-dimensional space represent all the scientific hypotheses offered to explain a phenomenon. If there does exist a scientific truth (let's call this our goal), that is
irrefutable, then it must be a point in this space, and reaching this point is the objective of all scientific methods. At a given instant in time, we may be aware of a set of hypotheses (or points in this space), and we know that one point in this space refers to the momentary truth referred to by Einstein.

What Phaedrus seems to ignore is that good scientific methods at a given instant in time will use its current knowledge (i.e., points in the space we are aware of) to guide its exploration through this space. This is the foundation of any good scientific research. Take any article written in a scientific journal, and you will find a section dedicated to related research, which considers what hypotheses have been discovered, and how does the new hypothesis presented compare with the previous results. The result of using current knowledge is to fine-tune the exploration of the hypotheses space. Thus, the aim of research is to figure out what parts of this space may be meaningless to pursue (in other words, what new hypotheses are probably weaker in the test of time), and thus turn in the direction of the hypothesis that will stand the test of time. This direction, hopefully, is towards the point that we have set as our goal. Thus, from this standpoint, our path through this space will be fine-tuned with time and will in fact increase our chances of reaching our goal. The weakness in Phaedrus argument is his own critique on the
"romantic" method --- he feels overwhelmed with new hypotheses that pop up all the time. In feeling overwhelmed, he gets dis-oriented, and loses sight of our current path in this space.

A classic example of this space is our drive to explain gravity in the cosmos. What we know today about Newton's laws of gravity and all other physical laws that are based on it, are that they are observable only on Earth. There is a new approach, string theory, that attempts to tie in gravity with the rest of our physical laws. This is a scientific inquiry into describing a new hypothesis to replace old ones (Newton's laws). We are not being overwhelmed by new hypotheses as time progresses. In fact, Newton's laws are still the best hypotheses explaining the physical phenomenon at this point in eternity. Perhaps, it will be replaced if string-theory researchers encounter a break-through, but this will imply that it is a much stronger hypothesis than Newton's. To Phaedrus, the sheer abundance of new hypotheses is a disappointment.

Hence, I dismiss Phaedrus's claim that "time spans of scientific
truths are an inverse function of the intensity of scientific effort" as pure rhetoric without any basis. In fact, if intensity of scientific effort is well directed, then it provides better focus for our exploration through this space. Thus, I cannot but dismiss the remainder of Phaedrus argument in this chapter relating to "the predicted results and actual results of scientific inquiry being diametrically opposite", etc. All these corollaries are based on poorly deduced claim.

However, there are still a number of very interesting contemplations in the book. I only have trouble with the method of analysis chosen by Pirsig. Ask any scientist and they'll tell you that the most beautiful theorems and laws are the simplest ones. In this regard, Phaedrus's convoluted, heavy analysis fails miserably. It is because of the heavy analysis, that he is able to introduce rhetoric without the reader being even aware of it.

Pirsig takes us on a literary chautauqua that dives into the split between romanticism and clasicism, and speaks magnitudes about the philosiphies and sciences of Eastern and Western Cultures. The book has seized rave reviews across the globe, and held best-seller status for record amounts of time. One wonders, what could possibly be in this book that has made it so accredited for such a long time? The answer is that the book takes the reader on a journey that was never supposed to happen. Pirsig elucidates, in four hundred pages, about the conflicts with his son, and himself. Phaedrus, Pirsig's former personality, is represented as a ghost from Pirsig's past. Phaedrus takes the reader through Greek logic, Eastern culture, and Buddhist beliefs. The book gives a good explanation of the differences in Eastern and Western cultures, and how the splitting of the two has caused problems throughout the world.
Coming from a background of the dry sciences, my reading of classical literature is hardly amazing. These two topics do not go together and rarely have anything to bridge the gap. This book does that job wonderfully. For the first time, I understood literature of this complexity, because it deals with the sciences and the arts; it kept me interested and also made me relate my life to the characters lives.
So, what do I suggest? If you have the time, the patience, and an open mind, this book will do you wonders and will stick with you for years to come.

Another reviewer said that people who don't like this book would be people who want a lot of action in their novels. Booo! Low blow. I enjoy reading philosophy, but this book was awful. The author is just plain illogical. He draws ridiculous conclusions. If you are going on a journey of the mind, you should not have a guide who is incapable of thinking straight. If you love this book, then you will be very comfortable with illogical statements and I recommend you read a book on logical thinking.

Do you enjoy the intellectual depth that greeting cards provide? How about the careful thought that bumper stickers demonstrate? Are you excited by windbags, braggarts, pedants, and Mr Know-it-alls? Do you drool at the thought of yet another dispatch from the me generation, the baby boomers? If so, this book will thrill you. If not, in other words, if you enjoy challenging reading and original thinking you will find this tome dull, cliche-ridden, pretentious, and authoritarian.

I write only to defend a gifted author's brilliant work of philosophy. I stopped by this page to check the reviews, and was horrified to find so much negative feeling. My argument, obnoxious as it might sound, is that all the gripes others have with this book are rooted in their fundamental misunderstandings of the text.
This book is a work of popular philosophy, which explores previously uncharted territory somewhere between Mysticism and dialectical engaging of truth. It deals with an overview of Western though in this area, and proposes its own unique theses. I have changed the way I live my life based upon the sage advice of this novel.
As far as I can see it, one of the main criticisms of the novel is that it starts off well, with a compelling problem, and what seems to be an innovative solution to it, but pans out to be an intellectual cop-out. This is not the case. The Amazon.com review declares, "His solution to a synthesis of the rational and creative by elevating Quality to a metaphysical level simply repeats the mistakes of the premodern philosophers." Which premodern philosophers would those be? I believe that Mr. Bruya means "pre-socratic" not "pre-modern," but even this criticism is invalid. Pirsig acknowledges that he owes an intellectual debt to the Sophists of ancient Greece, but his ideas far surpass theirs. Rationality, as it exists today, did not exist at the time of the Sophists, therefore he must necessarily expand beyond the scope of their understanding of philosophy to maintain his relevance to the modern day, which he certainly does, through many specific modern examples.
Mr. Bruya continues to argue that, "the narrator's claims to originality turn out to be overstated, his reasoning questionable, and his understanding of the history of Western thought sketchy." Sure, Mr. Pirsig had intellectual precursors, such as the Sophists, the 20th century pragmatists (William James, etc...), and others, but I challenge anyone reading this to come up with someone who has prefigured Quality. Secondly, his "reasoning" is "questionable": give me one example of faulty logic in the book! Pirsig, though he rejects the supremacy of dialectic, is still a master-dialectician, and his logical entrenchments are flawless. Finally, his understanding of Western though is most certainly top-drawer. Yes, it is incomplete, because the majority of Western though does not speak to his point, but that which he does cover is correct. I challenge anyone to come up with an incorrect point he makes about that which he does cover. As a student of philosophy, Mr. Pirsig's command is entirely correct, in my understanding of things.
I also challenge whatever Mr. "Rampageous Cuss" has to say, as I feel that his command of the book, and the ideas therein, is incomplete and juvenile. He states, "It's neither well structured nor well written, and its philosophical insights are more deeply felt than deeply thought." The writing is extremely fine, and if Mr. Cuss was not engaged by it, it speaks to his short attention span, not the author's skill. He does not use flowery, empty rhetoric, his writing is immediate and to-the-point, reminiscent of other American greats, such as Thoreau, or Stephen Crane. The structure of the book is extremely complex, and Mr. Cuss' comment on it simply belies his faulty understanding of it. There are, in fact, three separate characters in the book: Phaedrus, the narrator of the novel, and then Robert Pirsig the writer himself. That the narrator seems to contradict his own philosophy is not a flaw in the writing, it is a carefully structured didactic narrative, in which the contradictions are meant to point out the ultimate philosophy of the book. The narrator of the book is not meant to be a morally immaculate character. He is merely a character meant to express a point.
Mr. Cuss then says, "Unhappily he decides he was a misunderstood genius, names his pre-breakdown self 'Phaedrus' and rambles into a tendentious complaint about academia as he relates his earlier life." Robert Pirsig was a misunderstood genius. What part of this book could be classified as "rambling" is beyond me. Mr. Pirsig seems sincere and intelligent in every stage of his discourse, and, like all of the other negative reviewers, Mr. Cuss has failed to cite any specific examples of this "rambling" making himself effectively immune to criticism. His complains about academia are well-supported with specific evidence of his empirical experience in academia. His arguments are all logical and correct.
Finally Mr. Cuss makes the grandly fallacious assertion that, "as the narrator he is pompous and self obsessed, struggling with a massive inferiority complex. He is given to sweeping pronunciamentos and overblown metaphors." The narrator of the book is meant as a teaching tool, in the same way Plato used the Sophists in his dialogues as advocates of bad ideas to reenforce his overall good ideas. The narrator is meant to seem pretentious and self-contradictory. His terrible relationship with Chris is proof of this. He finishes his speeches on caring about human rapport, and then treats his son horribly. He is a character, meant to illuminate the message of the novel, nothing more. I would also argue that not only are there no "overblown" metaphors, but that the language is largely non-metaphorical. Pirsig rejects metaphors as a means of understanding, as Plato used them (the Horse and Chariot analogy of the soul comes to mind). If Mr. Cuss is referring to the vague descriptions of Quality, as "overblown metaphors," he needs to understand that Quality cannot be subordinated to language, and there is only the realm of analogue to clarify it.
Overall, this is the second best book I have ever read, and I assure you all that if you read and take the time to understand this book, you too will love it. It is a sublime journey to the high country of the mind, and you will not be sorry.

Maybe I was expecting too much. What would it focus more on: Zen or motorcycles? I'm interested in both topics, yet this book came nowhere near to satisfying me on either of them.

Zen and the art of Motorcycle Maintenance was a huge disappointment for me. I totally concur with the sentiments in the review by the guy from Seattle.

I finished this book feeling depressed and disheartened, and all the way through it I wondered why there was hardly any love shown to the author's son.

If you want to find out about Zen, buy a copy of Zen made Easy by Timothy Freke. If you're new to bikes, buy magazines or visit your local two-wheeler store and get advice from the experts.

I could have gone for a hike, played a round of golf, painted the house or, better still, gone for a ride on a motorcycle - pastimes far more worthy of my time than reading this depressing, prolix book.

Perhaps this book is so popular because of the timing of when it was published and since then it has run on its own momentum. In any case, to the curious reader, be prepared for an unoriginal, mostly dry, dull book. If one wants and intro to Philosophy, one would do better to read Durant's "The Story of Philosophy", Russell's "History of Western Philosophy", or nearly any intro to philosophy written by someone qualified to speak on the subject. The attribute lacking in the author of "Zen" is humility. He seems to think that any pedestrian insight he has is original with him. He does not seem to be aware of even the basics of western philisophical thought. Although he apparently has had much classroom instruction on the matter, maybe he doesn't listen well, or he can't give credit to others for having ideas also.

On the positive side he has a few good analogies, but these are few and far between. If the point of the book is that "quality" is a mysterious word because its difficult to define, that's true of many words, try to define "the" or "of". Is his point we should not always chose quantity over quality? Oh ,please! That is hardly an original idea. The author and his fans seem to believe that any idea that crosses his mind is worthy of worldwide attention. A dialogue on philosophy has been going on for hundreds of years, and many very bright people have contributed their thoughts. It is very naive and arrogant to imagine that one's own thoughts would revolutionize the subject (although that is what every barroom know-it-all believes). Professing one's adoration for this book only gives away one's ignorance.

I'm not suprised to see several one star reviews here on Amazon claiming this book is the most boring piece of literature ever. It's not, and whenever I hear a bad review of this book I think how they would react if they cracked Herodotus' "Histories".

This novel isn't for everyone. Most people that pick it up out of curiosity are likely to put it down. Mr. Pirsig states in the foreward that its not a spiritual guide or very helpful with motorcycle maintenance. In fact, Pirsig was denied several hundred times from various publishing companies when he tried to print his masterpiece. The title is misleading, but that's not what I'd like to talk about.

The story tells us of Pirsig, and his son Chris, and of their "Chautauqua" across the western states. Shortly after the beginning Pirsig introduces his philosophical "other" self, Phaedrus (named from one of Plato's dialogues'). Phaedrus is more conflicted and anxious than the Pirsig narrating the story. He's almost obsessed with his work; people, and what Quality really means.

As the first reviewer visible says, there are thousands of years of Philosophical thought in these few hundred pages. Most of it is Western thought (once again, "Zen" seems to mislead as a title) concerning what was probably the thoughts of the more liberal nobles in several Greek polises and Roman cities.

"What is Quality?" This question Phaedrus asks himself after having his thought provoked by a lonely secretary in the school where he teaches. That one phrase delves into a thought process that lasts most of the book's remaining pages, drawing parallel's between Pirsig & Chris and their journey across the West.

Watching the two story-arc's develop was quite a treat, and there were several pages on the system of Education that had me fascinated and mentally hungry for more. Pirsig seems to have put his entire heart into this novel, and that's one of its small problems: it is a novel. Why teach philosophy as a semi-autobiographical novel? He may have wanted more people to learn of Socrates and other great teachers (which certainly happened by looking at the strong underground fanbase this book has), or may have started the novel without it, and masked some of the books more subtle insecurities with Platonics.

It's not clear as to why it's presented the way it is. However, by the ending of the book you'll be astonished at how much you may have learned about yourself (as cliche as this sounds, it does leave you thinking - not many novels do it with this depth). And I strongly urge you to read this book in private and be wary of reviews you read. Many boast about this novel's shocking ending, and I urge you to find out why yourself.

Overall, ZAMM is a novel and more. It's the human heart, with all its inconsistencies and heartaches, laid down with hundreds of years of Western thought and psychology in a single novel. The characters feel real (I still think about Phaedrus often, years after reading it), and not one word is wasted in telling the story of these wonderful, flawed human beings. Those that give it bad reviews probably don't have the patience to sit down and enjoy a novel that requires thought and attention.

They're probably the same people who think all bikers are the same. Well, let me tell you - I know atleast one of the highest Quality.

There are only a handful of books that have really changed the way I've looked at things; Jerzy Kosinski's The Painted Bird, Victor Frankl's Man's Search for Meaning, Julian Jayne's The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bi-Cameral Mind, Ludwig von Mises' Human Action and Robert M. Pirsig's Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance (ZAMM). Pirsig's book may be the most profound because it not only challenges, but re-labels our entire thought process, challenging many of our most deeply held values. In fact, it's subtitled, (An Inquiry Into Values).

Proof that I'm not alone in assessing the impact of ZAMM is the fact that it has remained in print for nearly three decades since it was first published in 1974. That's quite an achievement for a book with such a clunky title - a book whose first publisher warned Pirsig not to expect "much more" than the $5,000 advance because, "works of this kind rarely sell in volume" and whose author readily states up front that it "has little to do with the study of Zen and isn't all that accurate when it comes to motorcycle maintenance either."

On the surface, ZAMM is a very simple story about the narrator's cross-country trip on motorcycle with his emotionally troubled son, Chris and their technologically challenged neighbors, John and Sylvia Sutherland. Pirsig wraps a brilliant philosophical analysis of values, in a road story that pits Phaedrus (the narrator's former self) against his current, post-electroshock persona, his son and the techno-phobic Sutherland's.

The story unfolds as a series of talks or Chautauquas, in which the narrator explores such topics as "Classical (emphasis on underlying function) Vs Romantic (emphasis on external form)" styles of thinking, "defining quality" and "insanity as a rejection of the accepted mythos" (an idea previously explored by Thomas Szass).

Ultimately, Pirsig does nothing less than re-focus the nature and definition of QUALITY. What is it? How do we define the "present" when everything we're conscious of has already happened, been processed and is already a part of the past?

Phaedrus looks at quality and notes, "we all know it when we see it, but how is it truly defined? What makes one thing of greater or less "quality" then another?" He comes close to quantifying it in his "Church of Reason Lecture," which starts on page 142 of the original paperback release.

Pirsig breaks the world down into two outlooks, Classic (which focuses on the underlying function) and Romantic (which focuses on the outer-lying form). Aesthetics (the study of beauty) is form based or Romantic thinking, while mechanics (the study of how things work) is function based or Classical thinking. He uses this to explain why different people see the same world in very different ways. In this journey he shows the difference between the two as the difference between the narrator's Classical outlook and that of the Sutherland's Romantic one.

John and Sylvia both enjoy the look and feel of riding a motorcycle, but despise the mechanical chores of keeping it functioning at top proficiency. John is proud of his shiny, new and very expensive BMW motorcycle, but can't get into the daily maintenance of it. Phaedrus, on the other hand, is primarily attracted to and focused on the underlying form of the motorcycle. He is fascinated with how it works and what causes it to break down. Phaedrus is interested in the mechanics of the bike because he wants to minimize its weaknesses and maximize its effectiveness. The Sutherland's just want to ride, and to avoid at all costs the mechanics of the thing because that's what they're on vacation for - to get away from the mechanistic world.

This Classic/Romantic split is important today because it explains all of our contemporary socio-political schisms so well. Emotional thinking is always Romantic, while pragmatic or logical thinking is always Classical. Both sides see only one true way of looking at things and both overlook an important part of the puzzle of life.

It's why so many Leftists wear the "bleeding heart liberal" tag as a badge of honor. It feeds their emotionalism. Anything that sounds compassionate, feels good or "helps people," is, to their form based thinking, "good," and people who espouse self-reliance and individual responsibility are, in their view, "mean-spirited, Social Darwinists and well...evil" On the other hand, that's why economic Libertarians and social conservatives see "do-gooder liberals" as "grossly misguided dupes who care nothing for helping people help themselves and as well...evil."

It's why, Romantic thinkers rarely use facts. They support their positions on what "feels right," or "fair." It's also why, when emotional Leftists are confronted with facts they don't like, they interpret the data as "angry" or "argumentative." This also explains why Classical thinking Libertarians and Romantic thinking Leftists don't communicate. Classicists deal in pragmatics and facts, while Romantics deal in feelings and appearances.

What Pirsig does, is synthesize both Classical and Romantic components into a sort of "unified field theory" of living. He offers a vision of a complete whole - a fusion of logic and emotion, form and function. An ideal whole that we're still very far from. An ideal that cost his narrator, Phaedrus, dearly.

Upon reaching Montana, the Sutherland's split and head south, while the narrator and his son head on toward Bozeman, the College town in which the narrator's former self (Phaedrus) taught. As they get closer to Bozeman, the pull of the narrator's former self (Phaedrus) grows stronger and he begins reliving some of the philosophical questions that had brought Phaedrus to the brink of emotional breakdown.

The entire book becomes a journey of self-discovery in which the reader comes along for a ride. As the narrator gets in touch with the questions and pursuits of his former life, he realizes that, in order to connect with his son, Chris, he must first confront his former self (Phaedrus). Read it for yourself, it's truly a modern day masterpiece.

After all these years as an active reader, I still consider Robert Pirsig's incredible tour-de-force in this book to be the intellectual adventure of a lifetime, one that still makes me shake my head in wonder after a number of readings of it. I was introduced to "Zen" by my brother in law, who promised me that I would enjoy it. Wow, what an understatement! By now I must admit to now having several short quotes from it framed under glass at various spots in the house, because I was so taken by the gravity of what he has to say, and the disarmingly simple way he usually chooses to say it. Pirsig is a man with a lot to say, and a lot of wisdom in what he has to offer.

Although I must admit that I do not agree with certain key aspects of his argument regarding the way the ancient bifurcation between what he calls romantic and classic perceptive orientations can at last be repaired and restored to cognitive and intellectual unity, I stand in utter awe at the quality of mind any human being must have to marshal such a breath-taking effort as this, at the accomplishment of conceiving and articulating the philosophical treatise described in such loving and painstaking detail here. His grasp of such eclectic, obscure and philosophically central notions truly is a feat quite the equal of the ascent of Everest in terms of the levels of concentration, mental endurance, and simple cognitive acumen necessary to muster this kind of argument.

The book works on two levels that both assist and complement each other. First, the story narrative, which he uses both to illustrate ideas he is talking about and to introduce ideas he wants to discuss, also acts to bring us back to "normal everyday reality' after spinning high in the thin cold air of his theorizing. Second, the philosophical story becomes a kind of sophisticated detective story for curious intellectuals, as Pirsig's alter ego, Phaedrus, searches deeper and deeper into the mysteries that once led him into insanity because of the sheer intensity of his efforts to solve the riddle of the difference between the two seemingly irreconcilable aspects of reality (the romantic and the classic).

The book is an awe-inspiring trip into a discovery of the nature of reality, contemporary society, and yourself. It has led to study groups, study guides, and a whole cult of Pirsig watchers who consider him the functional equivalent of the wise seer. The wildly best-selling book also led Pirsig deeper into a life of isolation, eschewing publicity and seeking greater introspection. There is a sequel, called "Lila", which also enjoyed a best-selling run on the charts in the early 1990s. This is a book that is quite unlike anything else you have ever read, and is something you have to experience to understand in its full impact. It is also a book I can recommend with a smile, knowing with confidence you will be glad you finally decided to buy it and read it. Enjoy!

Many of my thoughts keep returning to ZAMM. It has been a while since I read it last, and I am going to read it again. I have spent the last couple of hours reading reviews here, and it's evident that there is wide disparity in how readers receive this book. One has to wonder what that says. Is Mr. Pirsig onto something or not? Personally, I am confident that he is, and the way that it is done is so masterful as to be almost magical. At times, I can spot something that doesn't ring quite true, but it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter because the truth that he is trying to tell is still there.

Multiple themes are woven together: the ride across some of America's best with his only son and the relationship that's theirs alone, a narrative about insanity through the clouded memory of someone that had/has been labeled as such, an examination of western philosophy and its influence on western thought, an alternative eastern perspective, and more.

For many of us that are writing reviews here, Persig begins to unlock a whole realm of possibility. The possibility that awareness of existence (quality, truth, God, whatever you want to call it) may be approachable by non-rational means. Neither logic, anlaysis nor the scientific method may provide the ultimate path. And, without these familar touchstones we are threatened to lose our certainty. Accepting this possibility is both liberating and frightening! It is to stand on the threshold of . . . In a sense, it's a simular place in thought to where the world stood when Columbus discovered the new world.

To be willing to follow Persig with Phaedrus and participate in his Chautauquas is an adventure in courage. One must look into the frailities of our own sanity. It is tempting to deny to oneself this vulnerability, and doing so may render this book meaningless and shallow. However, the participative reader finds the captivation of an "Alice in Wonderland."

Not a text, not a novel, not fiction. It is an autobiography! It's hard to believe that it's true, and the book ends before the story ends -- just like life and the reality that endures. Robert Pirsig is a hero to have gone so far in pondering the "deep channels", and then in sharing his bounty with us.

I'm going to read it again. Thank you Robert.

Despite the book's title, Pirsig's journey is primarily one through the history of Western philosophy, from the pre-Socratics through Plato, Aristotle, the 18th century empricists, and 19th century idealists. On this level alone, the book succeeds in being one of the most accessible and reliable treatments of the field. But the text is also a critique of the whole Western "logocentric" tradition, with its emphasis on reason, or "dialectic." Like Kant ("Critique of Pure Reason") or Kierkegaard ("Concluding Unscientific Postscript"), Pirsig uses reason to expose the limitations of reason. And what does he replace it with? Not Eastern mysticism or Zen riddles but rhetoric. More than the classic rhetoricians that Pirsig exhalts or the 20th-century structuralists and post-structuralists (Barthes, Derrida, Foucault) for which Pirsig's narrative is practically an illustration, "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" makes the case for language as the basis for all reality, for all that we think, experience and perceive. It's this conflict between dialectic and rhetoric that drives the narrative, realized in plain yet compelling prose that's capable of staying with the attentive reader for the rest of his or her lifetime. After reading the book twice, I was unable to look at the self, the world, at all things constructed by language in quite the same way. The least successful parts of the book, it seems to me, are the narrator's protracted discussions of the nature of "reality" as a moment inaccessible to human intellect and his somewhat naive, 1960's-style musings on the nature of "quality." Supposedly his English composition students were immediately able to know it when they saw it, thereby making it unnecessary for him as a teacher to talk about "standards" or to establish criteria. (The suspicion arises that Pirsig hasn't had a great deal of experience teaching students how to write.) Nevertheless, even when a cylinder occasionally misfires, this is a book worth reading carefully and more than once. Unfortunately, because of its "cult" status, many people seem to purchase the text but never finish it. Robert Redford owns the screen rights, but a reader would be ill-advised to wait for the movie version. The "visual" elements of the text--the motorcyle odyssey and troubled father-son relationship--are minor metaphors compared to the ambitious and largely successful intellectual quest.

My 10-year-old son asked me what I wanted for Christmas last year, and I suggested two books I had known about for 20 years or more, but had never actually read: "On the Road" by Jack Kerouac, and "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" by Robert Pirsig. He got them both for me, and now, at age 47, I've read them both. Kerouac's book is a breathless, almost endless series of cross-country treks, written in a continuous "present" with little concept of a past or future.

"Zen", in contrast, is a book I wish I had read years ago, knowing full well I would not have understood or appreciated it until now. Pirsig's literary journey is careful and methodical, painstakingly documenting both the physical landscape through which he and his son are riding, and the elaborate philosophical landscape through which humanity has traveled in the last several millennia. It is a history of philosophy which ultimately rejects much of the Aristotelian analysis underlying Western scientific method. I hated philosophy and theology in college, for a variety of reasons, and wish I had this guidebook (and 40+ years of experience) handy as I sat through Metaphysics. Pirsig makes clear the seminal importance of many of the competing ideas of Eastern and Western philosophy, in ways I don't think any of my college professors could have. On a more personal note, Pirsig develops his complex line of thought while traversing the American west with his son Chris on the back of his motorcycle. His discourse with the reader is extensive, highly emotional and intensely personal, while his interaction with his son is almost non-existent. More than once I wanted to yell at Pirsig to stop the bike and talk to Chris instead, only to realize that my own conversations with my own son Chris were, in many ways, similarly perfunctory and self-limiting. In my opinion, no one can read this book without gaining some insight into their own soul, their own values and their place in the world.

1. You have an interest in philosophy but have been put off by the literature spawned by academia on the subject.
2. You are passionate about pursuing meaning/value/purpose/that which is good.
3. You are interested in high-level thinking about the world; theorizing that could hold everything in the world together, from art to science to religion to motorcycle repair.
4. You have problems with either science or art (i.e., "I'm not a science/art person"), and would like a bridge to understand or appreciate better the world of science or art.

I write this review primarily because I consider this the best book I have ever read, and it has made a profound and lasting change in the way I think about everything. That said, it's a fact that some people will like this book and some won't. Rather than speak to the relative merits of the thoughts Pirsig proposes (judged how exactly?), I write more to offer my thoughts on whether the book will speak to you.

There have been some rather hostile reviews of ZATAOMM from philosophic academia and from those who think it is over-hyped or just plain boring. As to the former, some have suggested that the book is so bad that it will forever ruin the mind of anyone interested in studying philosophy. Anecdotally, I read this book when I was 17 and proceeded to earn a philosophy degree with honors from an ivy league university. More generally, I question the motives and mindset of anyone who feels that mere words could forever ruin a person's intellect.

That said, it would be a waste of time to analyze this book from the analytical paradigm of American philosophical academia. If that's your perspective, more power to you, but don't read the book if you can't/don't want to suspend that mentality for a moment to consider an alternate mode of thinking. As to those who find it boring, that's another way of saying the ideas raised in the book don't speak to you. While I felt it was a pleasure to read, ZATAOMM isn't a masterpiece of literature; it lives and dies on its ideas.

Finally, over-hyping anything is dangerous, so while I obviously loved the book, I advise anyone reading it for the first time to read it with an open mind, with no expectations. Pick it up--you'll know in the first thirty pages if you'll like it.

This is one of the great books of our time, but it is a fairly difficult read. If that doesn't concern you, there is no reason to continue reading the reviews. Just buy it.

WARNING: If you do continue reading the reviews, do not read the one entitled "Spaghetti thoughts put into words." He gives away a pretty significant part of the ending. You will enjoy it more if you don't know what's coming.

After reading about 1/2 of the 170+ comments on this book i see two types, those who soaked in Pirsig's point of view, and those who read it specifically for the philosophical (or is it psychological) worth. The former were tromendously satisfied and the latter were not so.

After reading the book two and a half times (first as required reading in a Psychology course) i felt it necissary to expound my views on it. The first time through i was reading for content and answers for quiz material - i truly missed the spirit of the book, the underlying truth that was presented by a confused and enlightened man. Once the pressure was over, i read it as Phaedrus would have - line by line. I started mulling over the unknowns and unanswerables that were presented and i found that the voice of the book was the voice of my proverbial soul - i had believed what the book presented before i read it which is just as confusing and bewildering as my mind and the world. It made me understand that truth is not always rational, what is rational is not always right, and what is right not always the truth.

The crux, I believe, is that this book is meant for those who are seeking something more, and those who are forced into reading it, or read it merely because it was suggested will not truly get out of it what is intended - a bit of enlightenment that proves how unenlightened our world and ourselves are.

An excellent examination of the deep, nearly invisible, internal incongruities of Western society. Read it in my early twenties and it changed my life. When you read and understand the way our minds and hearts are programmed by our society, and how that programming leads us to goals that don't satisfy or unsuccessful pursuits of happines, it's almost a religious experience.

The reviews posted here don't call enough attention to the paradox Pirsig examines, and here it is:

you are brought up to believe that what is right, what is true, what is logical will prevail in the end. That logic is truth. The problem is that rhetoric overpowers logic, and rhetoric is the tool of those who further their dark ends by pushing our buttons -- buttons we don't even realize we have.

Sure, we all may look at that statement and say "Yeah, so what?" The beauty of this book is how it helps us get past that 'rhetorical' mind set, the "So What" mind set. Getting past it is no small feat. It's also hard to get past the smirks of your peers. This book helps you look inside yourself and realize not only where, but why you are making decisions and behaving in ways which prevent you from growing as a person and transcending the banality of consumption as a way of life.

When you finish reading this book and try to explain it to someone else, you will find yourself at a loss for words because there is virtually no vocabulary, no paradigm around which to discuss it. Yet another major paradox of our society. When you extend this line of thinking a bit, it becomes clear that the message in this book is not for glib conversation, a la Frazier Crane. You can't change other people much; but you can change yourself. And that's an internal conversation.

When I look at how ZAMM asks some painful, bedrock questions about our lives, I wonder where the answers are. The only book that seems to address some of the questions is Steven Covey's book on the Seven Ha! bits. Problem is, how do we un-program ourselves so we can move toward Covey's paradigm. I don't pretend to know the answer. So maybe we need the third book to complete the set for the modern philosopher.

This book demands multiple re-reading. It's the most profound book I've read in English.

I am an avid reader and consider myself fairly intelligent. I was excited to receive this book as a present since I heard so many wonderful things about it. The person who gave it to me said I would find myself referring back to it every 5 years of my life.

Maybe it is me, but this book did not enlighten me. I made through 60 pages and realized it was just not the book for me. I found it long winded and I kept asking myself why I felt the need to go on.

I finally had to good sense to stop. I felt like I was reading something written by an insane person that was projecting his own reality onto the world.

This book opens:
And what is good, Phaedrus,
And what is not good--
Need we ask anyone to tell us these things?

If you are one of those that can keep your eyes open through this book then it will likely touch your mind and your life for years to come.

I first read this work as a high school student in an AP English class where we studied it, discussed it, disected it and taught it to one another. This book taught me how to think. And it taught me I can understand anything if it's written clearly enough and if I'm willing to put some thought into it.

Everything in this book interconnects...the characters involved, the setting, the philosophy--decoding the connections (such as wind and heights to phaedrus' appearance) is half the fun.

Reading it again after 15 years I find that some of my basic assumptions about the world and life stem from this book. I remember some of Pirsig's babies such as "stuckness" and "gumption" and they are thoughts I've loved to play with over the years. Other ideas--such as the split between eastern and western cultures and various philosophers--have perhaps subtily played with ME through the years. I enjoyed discovering this during my latest re-read.

It is so worth the effort to read about Pirsig's views on mechanization, the front windshield being compared to a TV screen, teaching english and so many other things. If you like to think (and why wouldn't you?) you will love this book.

That being said,I do feel that Pirsig's logic is flawed. And I enjoyed every step of figuring out why I believe the way I do. This book is a fascinating study into the personality of a proud intellectual grappling with subjectivity.

I say, read this book and think.

Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance (which may be the best title of all time) is a bizarre and insightful journey into ... well, psychology, motorcycle maintenance, and pretty much everything in between. This unique book is impossible to classify. Its long-winded tangents into Zen philosophy range from inane navel contemplation to mystical mountaintop profundity.

The book begins with a first-person narrative of an unnamed man taking a motorcycle trip from Minnesota to the Northwest with his young son, Chris, and another married couple. The author's description of biking absolutely nails its allure, frustrations, and rewards. His book is required reading for all serious bikers (those who can read, that is). As the journey progresses, the narrator expounds upon the art of motorcycle maintenance and why some shy away from it, dividing riders into two groups: romantic and classic thinkers. Then he spends 100 pages splitting the romantic/classic atom. Surprisingly, the result is not some pot-smoker's rambling, but a sophisticated and well-informed essay on the human condition.

The book continues with alternating passages of narrator lucidity--as he describes their mundane travels through America's backwaters--and more deep dives into topics most of us have never invested two seconds pondering: the definition of technology, quality, duality, and Aristotelian reasoning. But Pirsig slowly introduces a third component to the story: a shadowy character named Phaedrus. A mystery develops for the reader. Is Phaedrus a real person? Or a figment of the narrator's imagination? His alter ego? Is the deep-thinking narrator schizophrenic? Or descending into madness?

Zen and the Art is at times maddening with its hour-long dissections of trivial matters, but will also have you seeing many things in a whole new light. Apparently, almost nothing in life is as it seems. In the end, it's a "quality" book (you'll have to read the book to understand this). I might have enjoyed it more as a younger, more idealistic person, but it's well worth the time investment at any age. --Christopher Bonn Jonnes, author of Wake Up Dead.

My dad encouraged me to read this book, and he had a free copy so I thought what the hell. I had a job at a coffee shop at the time and during down time I would read a few pages. Man, everyone has heard of this book. You don't know how many people came into the store and saw it sitting there and mentioned what a great book it was, I asked everyone of them if they personally read it and I can remember them all saying "Uh, well I heard it was good from a friend". Anyway, save your hard earned cash and buy a motorcycle manual or something this is the most boring book I've ever read. There's not a hint of inspired writing or insight here, then again I should have known better my dad reads books on playing chess.

The book is based on true accounts experienced by the author. The book doesn't really talk about Zen, but is more based on Western Philosophy. The author writes, "What follows is based on actual occurrences. Although much has been changed for rhetorical purposes, it must be regarded in its essence as fact. However, it should in no way be associated with that great body of factual information relating to orthodox Zen Buddhist practice. It's not very factual on motorcycles, either."

The book is about the author's cross-country motorcycle trip with his 8 year old son Chris, which leads to a journey of self-discovery. It is an examination of the spiritual relationship between a parent and a child, and man's search for reason. During this journey, the author teaches us about life and the human condition in a profound and thought-provoking way. It is a terrific book about philosophy and life, albeit a difficult read. After reading this book, you might reevaluate the way you live, go on a personal quest for the meaning of life, and be interested in reading more books on philosophy. In my case, the book made me want to read more about Kant and Hume, and review some of the books I read before on Plato and Aristotle.

Some of the deep philosophical questions and conundrums raised by the author are:

(a) Before Newton discovered The Law of Gravity, was there gravity? Did gravity exist before Newton or is it the thought of Gravity that suddenly manifested the Law of Gravity? Is it the thought of something that suddenly creates it?

(b) The Arabs and Indians used the `zero' before the Romans and Greeks. Why did the Greeks not invent the zero? How did their societies function for so long without the zero? Could it have continued without the discovery of `zero'? Was the `zero' always there regardless of whether it was discovered or not?

(c) All arguments, solutions, and scientific `truths' have already been invented. We simply discover the best solution.

(d) How do we define the "present" when everything we're conscious of has already happened, and is already a part of the past?

(e) Which self is the real you?

(f) What is good and what is bad? The book opens with the following quote:

"And what is good, Phaedrus,
and what is not good--
Need we ask anyone to tell us these things?"

(g) "Astronomers would be telling mankind that if he looked long enough through a telescope powerful enough, what he would see is the back of his own head."

(h) In life there is no grade, no pass or fail.

(i) "Any intellectually conceived object is always in the past and therefore unreal. Reality is always the moment of vision before the intellectualization takes place. There is no other reality."

(j) "Religion wasn't invented by man. Man was invented by religion." [No idea who invented women, hihihihihi]

(k) How can something can be exclusively "material," when our reality is exclusively spiritual

(l) We should remain open to the part of the world that is beyond appearances, beyond the so-called matter, and cannot be experienced but only imagined.

(m) How do you deal with technology and remain sane?

(n) Man searches for something that he can't quite define, identify or reach.

Plato and Aristotle, the author argues, conceived a system of thought in which beauty is severed from functionality. Functionality became less attractive to us than beauty. Plato and Aristotle, according to the author, committed a murderous act by this system of thought that is still carried out till today. "Quality" has thus been victimized.

The author went insane as a graduate student as he searched for the answer to "what is quality?", and spent considerable time at the asylum. He was subjected to shock treatments that wiped out his personality and most of his memory. He later realized that he was not really insane, but thought in a different level than most people.

Pirsig sees the problems in our world as the result of an overemphasis on beauty, when functionality is more essential. One reviewer puts it nicely, "...pure `function' has problems of its own. For example, our bodily organs carry out the function of allowing us to live, but one doesn't really desire for our skin to be translucent so we can watch these functions. In fact, we would have a revulsion to such a thing. Therefore, we have a combination of both "form" [beauty] and "function"; our organs work very well without our having to see them. This is the desirable state. This desirable state is called `Quality'."

However, `Quality' is indefinable. It comes before thought, and before actions. Any attempt at describing it is useless, because as soon as you attempt to, you are only talking about one aspect of it.

This is one of those books that you either both understand and enjoy or you don't. It is really all about timing, your past experiences and knowledge, and your reasons for reading this book in the first place. If you don't understand it put it down and wait until the time is right. Don't throw it away!

Read this book slowly if you really want to understand it. If you like to read thought provoking and intellectually challenging books, you will love it!

To close, one reviewer wrote, "Many of the negative reviews are from people who had a preconceived notion of what this book was before they read it (either from the title or from a recommendation) and were upset that it didn't meet their expectations. It seems to me that these folks have received their Zen lesson..."

Anyone with moderate intelligence and sufficient leisure can work out their own private philosophy. The worth of such a philosophy should not be measured by comparison to the great philosophers of the past (or present); rather we should ask how well does it assist its creator in coping with life. Some personal philosophies are crafted in such a way that they help, not just their creator, but large numbers of their creator's fellow beings. Thus it is with the personal philosophy of Robert M. Pirsig, who laments that he has not had an original thought in years.

"Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance" recounts a semi-mythical motorcycle trip from Chicago to California in which Pirsig confronts and defeats his inner demons and repairs his shattered relationship with his eldest son, Chris. With a past of involuntary hospitalization, a present of recurring nightmares, and a future of anticipated return to commitment, Pirsig rides the roads, introspects, and works on his relationship with his son.

Pirsig's former self, whom he calls Phaedrus, went mad attempting to work out the meaning of the abstract concept of quality; his current self totters on the brink of madness attempting to achieve a quality relationship with his son.

The book covers thousands of miles of countryside and thousands of years of Western philosophy, from Chicago to California, from the Academy to academia. Although the word Zen figures prominently in the title, and although Buddha is mentioned more than Socrates, the philosophy partakes far more of the tradition of the "Iliad" than of the "Bhagavad-gita."

Pirsig should not despair over his inability to formulate original ideas. Qoheleth wrote that "there is nothing new under the sun," and centuries later Omar Khayyam echoed that thought. Pirsig's chosen field of rhetoric recognizes man's basic lack of originality. The first of the five departments of rhetoric is Invention, the devising of arguments. An alternative name for that department is Discovery. The rationale for this alternate name is that the rhetorician does not "invent" arguments, all the arguments already been invented. The rhetorician simply discovers the best arguments for the case at hand. The rhetorician's originality is expressed, not in the department of Invention/Discovery, but in the department of Arrangement. How well are the arguments organized?

Pirsig may not have expressed any original ideas in "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance", but he has arranged those ideas in (for the 1970's) a fresh, original way. The enduring success of the book attests to Pirsig's creative genius.

Before I started reading "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance," the book had a lot going for it: stellar reviews on the cover, an intriguing title and its status as one of five or six books found in the meager philosophy section at Walden Books in Pocatello.

Unfortunately, despite these advantages, the book failed to deliver anything but ambiguity and disappointment. Don't get me wrong, it wasn't terrible, it just wasn't very good.

I'm not sure whether the book is a memoir, a novel or a philosophical treatise. In "Zen" Robert Pirsig tells the story of a motorcycle trip he went on with his son, Chris in the 1970s. But the story, I guess, is not really about the bike trip itself but the thoughts the author has about quality and technology.

The only interesting passage of the whole book can be found on page 17:

"The Buddha, the Godhead, resides quite as comfortably in the circuits of a computer or the gears of a cycle transmission as he does at the top of a mountain or in the petals of a flower."

That passage is good. The rest of the book is depressing and confusing. Throughout the entire motorcycle trip, the author ignores his son and becomes lost in his own head thinking deep thoughts about the definition of "quality."

I'm not sure if this book was intended as a novel, but if it was, it failed to produce character growth. It's standing as a work of philosophy is not much better. The author's ideas could have been explained in a 20 page essay and been much clearer.

Whatever the book was supposed to be, it didn't impressed me.

This book is appreciated by almost everyone with a desire to think and learn about the world they live in, but it's also misunderstood as to its content...

Phaedrus had issues with the Greek philosophers not because they combined the nature of "truth" and the nature of "good". They did no such thing. He had an issue with them because in their desire to order the world and create a method of looking at the world which could be understood and taught readily, they decided to set priorities: They decided that facts and truth in the scientific sense of the world was of the highest importance. The "good" that had been spoken of by the Sophists and others prior to the debates with Socrates was then called "virtue" and hacked up using the analytical knife of classic thought, with lots of definitions and research expended to figure out what made it tick. The result of this is our Aristotlean world, in which people have created and organized themslves brilliantly, yet don't seem to understand much about themselves and each other.

In some ways, Greek philosophers created the mode of thought for our current sociological thinkers. This mode of thought seems to say understanding the world is more important than creating a better world.

Phaedrus understood that Quality isn't something that can be defined in the sense Aristotle wanted to define everything. The only way to SEE Quality is to see its effect on those who witness it. It is undefinable, because it is always different. Quality is simply what works "better" or "best". People need to understand (even now, today!) that Quality can't be defined like an object can. It's a condition that describes life, art, ideas, actions, creations of any kind, and describing it isn't nearly as important as TRYING for it.

I can only imagine what happened in Phaedrus' mind when simple politics prevented him from sharing his viewpoint academically, but I've read ZAMM and it got me thinking about what people are GOING for in life. Why does it seem like everyone wants something and nobody knows why they want it? normal people don't like to ask these questions anyway, but even our best and brightest dodge the question in all but the most analytical of ways.

In the end, Quality is individual, and Pirsig says that his greatest faith for the future is in quality individuals making quality decisions. I like that.

If this isn't yuor kind of thing, I can sympathize: Sometimes it's very demanding to "think out" all of this books concepts, but it's a BOOK, and that's what it's best for. You can read it over and over, piece by piece until you know exactly what is being talked about. That this book is engaging and well written, creating intelligent, human and interesting characters and situations makes all this possible. Subjects this smart deserve writing this good!

Unfortunately, I have to agree with the previous writer here, Scott Carson, in his much more detailed review, that this book just didn't live up to its reputation. At the risk of criticizing one of the most legendary books of the metaphysically itinerant, agoraphobic, and spiritually questing 60s, I just didn't find it to be particularly deep, although it is sometimes entertaining and I did learn a few things here and there. But I'd heard about how profound the book was and about all the deep philosophy in it, but really, it doesn't even get to the level of your typical college Philosophy 1A class.