Wednesday, June 19, 2013

Introversion, Spiritual success, and Holden Caulfield.


Many people treat introversion as though it were a symptom of self-absorption. It is not. There is a common saying pervasive of all mystical religions that if one thinks that one understands God, one doesn’t. Yet one can have a good hunch. Some extraverts dabbling in religion may tend to develop a very social attitude towards what “spiritual” behaviour is, and that comes with a dogmatic disdain for “non-spiritual” or “egocentric” behaviour. Introverts may do this as well, but usually for different reasons. Spirituality, however, is concerned with wholeness, and in many historical instances, it was a form of counterculture. The mind that is thoroughly socialized tends not to think spiritually but practically; its entire view of the Universe is based upon external success and context. If it turns inward and begins to study itself, the whole Universe falls apart at one point, and what had been believed to have been objective has been proven to have been subjective. The outside was actually the inside, only the illusion was convincing because all of one’s peers had the same programming – to put it radically, they were all equally hypnotized. This realization, when it occurs in the “spiritual” person, is what mystics across many cultures, whether they be Christian theologians or Hindu yogis, describe as a leave-taking from God to God: What had been thought to be spiritual was only a part of the entire thing, and what had been condemned as egocentric is now recognized as the other half.

 

Speaking from personal experience, it appears impossible to draw a definite line between social behaviour and narcissistic behaviour. Narcissists treat other people as an extension of themselves, often presuming that all people see things in a manner akin to them. To be social is to do that, and it is often determined by one’s existing social disposition; in other words, you will tend to see life, socially, through a lens shared by people of your own economic class, ethnic background, and occupational interests. This form of conditioning, whilst comforting, is not very effective towards establishing connections with all of Humanity, much less the Entire Universe. Hence it is said that extraverts tend to excel socially whilst introverts tend to excel spiritually.

 

A good example of a social misfit motivated by spiritual values is Holden Caulfield from J.D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye. The prepositional clause “by spiritual values” may be disputed, but there is no doubt that Holden is a misfit and an introvert. At one point, he asks a taxi driver an innocent question, “Where do the ducks go when the lake freezes over?” (This is paraphrased here.) The driver is frustrated by the seeming pointlessness of the question, but this is nothing compared to how affronted Holden feels when no satisfactory answer arrives. Some may argue that he is entitled to an answer, and his sense of entitlement is narcissistic and typical of an infantile egoic activity. One must, however, consider the writer’s background and the various layers of meaning in the novel. In the first place, the question may be concrete, not symbolic: Neither the author nor the protagonist means anything by the question outside of its literal meaning. Maybe there is a symbolic meaning as well, and maybe the ducks are symbolic of Holden wondering where he will go now that he has been kicked out of school, but it is unlikely that J.D. Salinger, who has expressed in other works, sometimes through the voices of other characters and sometimes the author’s tone, which we can only guess at, a passionate disdain for psychiatrists, would offer such an explanation for Holden’s “motives” for the question. Maybe, indeed, some symbolism is intended, but the genius of Salinger would be in that the literal meaning equally stands.

 

From the perspective of Zen Buddhism, a major influence upon Salinger’s work, the question may be almost akin to a koan. A koan is a simple question that cannot be understood intellectually (e.g. “What is the sound of one hand clapping?”). It is meant to bring about in the individual who ponders it a mystical realization wherein the world is seen in an ineffable way that cannot be rationalized. Salinger uses the aforementioned koan as the epigraph to Nine Stories.

 

Holden’s question has no meaning outside of itself. He is not interested in establishing a conversation with the taxi driver, not because he is disinterested in the man, but because he does not want his conversation to follow the pattern of a “phony” conversation. He feels an admiration for the man and a sense of wonder at the man’s very existence, which is something that the taxi driver probably has little knowledge of. Yet it is this sense of wonder, typical of so many introverts, that dooms Holden. He is uninterested in socializing with the taxi driver, for it would only mire him and the driver both in a fairly uninspiring account of their personal memories of the day. He is much more interested in where the ducks go, a question which, whilst not serving any practical social purpose, be it the advancement of oneself in the fulfillment of a social skill or the affirmation of one’s worldview in agreement with another, is the kind of question that can be asked just as comfortably of an African child as of a seasoned American male. It is, whilst appearing marginal and almost insultingly irrelevant to the taxi driver, a simple, direct question that the more tender will discern as crushingly innocent and pure.

 

Speaking logically, one can presume that Holden expects to gain nothing by it except knowledge about the world around him; it is an example of disinterested learning. Who is entitled, therefore? Is Holden entitled for posing a question that can be asked of all of humanity(, given that the human spirit is incarnate in anyone living in this area of New York)? or is it the taxi driver, who wants only to talk about things pertaining to his way of life and his own social role in his particular society? Yes, only those who have lived in this part of New York would presumably know the answer, and yet it is unnerving to Holden that he cannot find one person who does know it.

 

Holden mentions, early on in the novel, that people “never notice anything”. Given the style that Salinger employs in all of his published writing, this may be construed as the author’s personal voice: One that is incredibly perceptive of detail. The Zen Buddhists make a point to notice their surroundings and to marvel in little things. Holden, whilst having this potentiality spiritually, lives in a society wherein he is faced with the shocking prospect that not one person he encounters has the time to answer this basic question. It is entirely counterintuitive that they would not, and the novel seems more or less, if one is to discern a single central theme from it, to deal with his horrifying realization that people do not in fact care about the things that he cares about. But does that make him narcissistic? No. It makes him spiritually aware. He wants to know where the ducks go, and he wants to pass this knowledge down to all children, but there is no room for him in this society. In a story from Nine Stories, “Teddy”, Salinger illustrates a young spiritual genius who claims that he had been an Indian holy man in a prior life, but that he was reincarnated in America as bad karma for falling in love with a girl. He makes the statement that America is the worst place to advance spiritually. Since most of Salinger’s characters are based upon his own reflections upon his own personality, this may in fact be the author’s point of view.

dm.A.A.

No comments:

Post a Comment