RE: down with zen

Sean Draine (seandr@Exchange.Microsoft.com)
Tue, 02 Mar 1999 12:02:33 -0800 

The Glass stories do tend to be more philosophically 
indulgent that Catcher. However, dismissing the whole lot of 
them as "tortuous" and "dinky" sounds like a lame (perhaps
even dinky?) attempt to come across as lofty and above-it-all. 

Salinger doesn't always hit his mark. But in some stories, 
like Franny and Zooey, I think Salinger comes off quite well,
both philosophically and (especially) stylistically. He touches
things like religion, poetry, psychology without stripping them
of their inherent complexity and ambiguity. He is anything but
pedantic. He is obviously quite intelligent. 

It's tempting to mention something here about throwing stones 
and glass houses, but I'll resist. 

-Sean


Scottie says:
>   Which is the reason, I suppose, the Catcher seems to me 
>   an incomparably finer & more moving piece than all 
>   the tortuous, dinky, philosophisings of the Glass family.



-----Original Message-----
From: Scottie Bowman [mailto:rbowman@indigo.ie]
Sent: Saturday, February 27, 1999 1:05 PM
To: Bananafish
Subject: down with zen



    Rick suggests that the 'solution' to our dissatisfactions 
    should be sought more in psychology or human relations 
    than in religion.  At heart, I suppose I agree with him - 
    though my scepticism about most schools of psychology 
    is as acid as my disillusion with all systems of religious belief.

    But should an artist concern himself primarily with either?  

    Since they are both ways in which people have thought 
    about their lives they're bound to appear, at least tangentially, 
    in any honest work of art that addresses our existence here 
    on earth.  I suggest, though, that a real artist, a real writer, 
    finds himself concerned mainly with the authenticity of 
    the world he creates, how real it feels, how alive it is.  
    Once he begins to 'illustrate' topics - like the 'point of existence', 
    or the 'best way to live' he becomes, no matter how well hidden, 
    a kind of preacher.  And begins to take his eye off the ball - 
    which for a writer I suggest should, above all, be the realisation 
    of the individual & what he makes of his world.

    Which is the reason, I suppose, the Catcher seems to me 
    an incomparably finer & more moving piece than all 
    the tortuous, dinky, philosophisings of the Glass family.

    Scottie B.