Snap, Crackle, Pop-Zen
Curtis Maxwell Perrin (cmp4x@virginia.edu)
Fri, 29 May 1998 09:07:12 -0400
>>>Date: Thu, 28 May 1998 14:15:23 -0700 (PDT)
>>>From: Yonatan Kaganoff <kagi@hotmail.com>
>>>To: bananafish@lists.nyu.edu
>>>Subject: Re: Salinger & Zen
>>>Message-ID: <19980528211523.19435.qmail@hotmail.com>
>>>
>>>I would be interested, although many of his reads on Zen reveal a 1950's
>>>pop-Zen, which are a useful segue into primary sources, but themselves
>>>are incorrect.
>>>Yonatan Kaganoff
Actually, I disagree. I checked up on some of the references Salinger made
to Zen translations, and they're pretty well respected, if dated. For
instance, he mentions R. H. Blyth as being a major motivation. I went and
looked for Blyth's books (which are lamentably difficult to locate!). It
turns out Blyth is considered one of the best transmitters of Zen to the
Western world--and Blyth was friends with D. T. Suzuki, who I wouldn't call
pop.
But even still, couldn't the pop Zen, be the zenniest Zen? I mean, a false
Zen would be one that took itself too seriously, whereas a pop Zen appearing
superficial might actually be the most authentic.
Has anyone else been reading up on R. H. Blyth?
C.M.P.