Sara Kallock: The Tao of Salinger


The Tao of Salinger

Sara Kallock

The sage never has a mind of his own;
He considers the minds of the common people to be his mind.

Treat well those who are good,
Also treat well those who are not good;
          thus is goodness attained.

The sage
          is self-effacing in his dealings with all under heaven,
          and bemuddles his mind for the sake of all under heaven.

The common people all rivet their eyes and ears upon him, and the sage makes them all chuckle like children.
                                                                   Lao Tzu[1]

The above excerpt serves as a simple characterization of the Taoist saint: a person who has subdued his ego thus enabling him to indiscriminately embrace all of humanity, attain for himself a fulfilling life in connection with the Tao (the “Way”), and the strength to be a example of righteousness according to the Way for mankind. Taoism holds that below the apparent chaos of reality lies a unifying theme of existence called the “the Way”, referred to as the Tao. This inherent “Tao” unites all of existence in a subtle harmony that is disturbed by any action a person’s ego forces upon it in an effort to change its nature. Such actions include brute force, prejudice, or judging the intentions of others, for any of these acts impede one’s perception of reality and thus create unneeded conflict that would otherwise not arise. Forceful imposition of one man’s view on another and cast judgment of another’s intentions and perspective only aggravates situations and blinds one from perceiving the world according to Tao. In order to attain an accurate perception of reality, one must live according to the Tao and use the humility of virtue instead of the forceful ego to “work like gravity between man and man”[2]. By acting in such an unimposing fashion, the Taoist saint is able to see the heart of the situation lucidly and pacify the situation with greater ease. By dissolving his misleading ego, a saint is able to live in deep understanding of the Tao, and indiscriminately love all of existence with enough virtue and patience to serve as an example of goodness for mankind. In Salinger’s works, the Taoist saint is a figure is present and colorfully captured in his numerous characters: the attempted saint is depicted in Catcher and the Rye’s Holden Caulfield; the mistreated saint is found in Teddy and Seymour; and in Franny and Zooey one finds the completed and socially successful saint in Zooey and Franny. These examples all emphasize Salinger’s passion for the ethical message Taoism proclaims: that “it is spiritually impossible to prevent the Fall [from innocence]”, so “Salinger’s idealistic heroes are doomed either to suicide (Seymour) or insanity (Holden, Sargent X) or mysticism (Franny), or the ways of sainthood” [3]. From the stories of each of these characters the path to potential fulfillment is proffered for the reader so one may, unlike many of Salinger’s character and perhaps Salinger himself, attempt to reach Taoist sainthood for himself.

Salinger held Eastern philosophies in high esteem throughout a majority of his writing career, as evidenced by his specific Buddhist diets, daily hours of deep meditation, and the emanation of “the essence of [Eastern] spirituality”[4]. A thorough critic can find throughout Salinger’s works the influences of Eastern philosophies, such as Zen Buddhism, Hinduism, and Taoism. Though Taoism is only lightly referenced, Salinger’s characters and their struggle for spiritual contentment, closely reflect the efforts and philosophies of Taoist philosophy. Buddy Glass, who at many points serves as Salinger’s persona throughout the Glass narratives, considers the roots of his thoughts and actions to be “planted in the New and Old Testament, Advaita Vedanta [of Hinduism], and classical Taoism,”[5] thereupon illustrating the bridge Salinger on which walks between Eastern and Western thought. Though Taoist doctrine does not rule Salinger’s works, the Taoist path to sainthood and contentment is reflected throughout Salinger’s writings and lived throughout Salinger’s life.

Though it could be argued that by the end of Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye Holden has found some measure of sainthood, he still lacks the forgiving love for humanity that would allow him the patience to be an example of Taoist righteousness; “he is an impotent saint, unable either to redeem the fallen or to prevent their fall”[6]. Taoism seeks to coincide with the natural patterns of person and nature; Holden however is consistently disenchanted with and contrary towards the dispositions of he various characters throughout the novel. What saintliness he possesses lies in the single epiphany he has concerning his younger sister Phoebe, for he realizes that she has the indispensable ability to embrace and “kiss”[7] him despite his failure to adequately succeed in society. Inspired by the example of her saintliness, Holden gains the mere recognition of the path to happiness but not the strength to walk it. Perhaps if Salinger had extended Holden’s story, the reader would find that Holden had successfully achieved a sense of wholeness with the aid of the wisdom his little sister’s innocent love revealed to him. However, Holden’s story ends with him uncertain about “what the hell to say”[8] to D.B.’s inquiry into his opinion of his fiancée instead of understanding and embracing her without bias as Phoebe did for him. Holden’s journey to Taoist sainthood ends ambiguously, for he is unable to fully love mankind as-is but is convinced he should; it is because of Phoebe’s loving sacrifice of his hat, which “gave [him] quite a lot of protection”[9] from the sufferings raining upon him, that he is able to look at her and be so “damn happy”[10] with relief that love exists. Though his feelings towards Phoebe are illuminated, he relates to the book’s other characters with a more or less dichotomous love. His ambivalence reflects the vain search for spiritual contentment in a phony and disappointing world; he is hence stuck in a limbo of confused compassion for mankind. Holden is unable to express any sort of compassion for D.B.’s “good-looking”[11] fiancée, who resembles the figure he has been repulsed by throughout the novel: a figure embodying a materialistic society; a society Holden lives in and despises; a society obsessed with Hollywood and plagued with people who make it practically impossible [12] to hold a genuinely intelligent conversation. He is only certain that he misses[13] the numerous characters throughout the book. This very act of simply “missing” these characters indicates that he wants to love them unreservedly but cannot  perceives them without regard to himself; he only identifies them in terms of his own consciousness and ego, yet a true Taoist saint dissolves his ego to the best of his ability in order to love fully without discrimination. A true Taoist saint would have no need to say he “misses” someone, for that would be selfish and tantamount to saying that he desires to fill the hole in his life and not sympathize with the humanity of the person of their desire. For when the ego is involved in an individual’s worldly perception, it has the potential to distort reality from being as it truly is and instead skew the presented reality as the ego desires. This disrupts the harmony that is existence and the way of the Tao decrees that  saints must be able to create inner peace by creating outer peace; thus in disturbing the harmony of existence they disturb their inner harmony. The Taoist approach to “staying out of trouble” and encourage outer peace is to be rather then do; to live “by attitude rather than act”[14]. So even though Holden’s attitude towards characters like Stradlater and Maurice is sympathetic by the end of the book, he still regards them from within the boundaries of his own perception: as people whom he has trusted and have let him down; his love, therefore, is not the egoless love Taoism professes. Holden somewhat forgives characters like Stradlater and Maurice for their misgivings towards him, but he cannot forget the betrayal of people he trusted like Mr. Antolini, the “sought-for, wise-good, father” (Baumbauch 56) Holden needs as an example of righteousness. Because of such disillusionments, Holden advises the reader to beware of trusting society and embracing it with indiscriminate trust. However, the Taoist professes that the distrust of the listener makes the speaker a liar, not the act an act of lying. In order for Holden to reconcile with a “phony” society that he has grown dissatisfied with he must not regard other’s actions as bad or good but as truthfully intended (whether the intention is openly stated or concealed by the person), and he is not doing this; Holden is letting his ego rule. If a person asks two forty-year old women their age, the first may answer, “I am forty”, because she is, in fact, forty. The other may answer, “I am thirty-five” because she fears old age; “the listener who understands the Tao of human nature catches this meaning…[and] to him she has told the truth”[15]. Holden, however, still sees humanity as inherently phony- unintelligent, shallow and distrustful- and renders people best when they are simply attractive and “deaf-mute”[16] instead of looking below their phoniness to find the truth. His disgust with society’s phoniness must be transformed into an empathetic patience before Holden can be a saint worthy of aspiration and endowed with the power to bring others to their own salvation. His immaturity impedes him from being a virtuous model for mankind because he “retreats into fancy- into childhood”[17], as is evident in his discussion on sex with Carol Luce in which he dismisses the notion of sex being spiritual and aims to discuss sex on its physical level: “I regard [sex] as a wuddayacallit- a physical and spiritual experience and all”[18], somewhat deriding Carlo’s previous statement on the spirituality of sex.. Holden cannot appreciate spiritual achievement yet because he is too resentful, too blinded by his loss of innocence to attempt harmony with the society and thus harmony with the Tao. This renders him incapable of serving as a model of virtue and spiritual strength.

It is clear that by the completion of The Catcher in the Rye, Holden has not achieved the spiritual accomplishment of sainthood; he is too shallow to love humanity, to immature to serve as a model of virtue to mankind and too egotistical to consider the individual outside of his own frame of conscience. Holden is incapable of seeing people objectively, and for that reason he cannot logically love them without the potential of his own inherent indiscrimination. Interestingly enough, Holden is a character that Salinger does not reuse like he does with Seymour and other Glass family characters. Holden may be an early attempt on behalf of Salinger to resolve Salinger’s own dissatisfaction with society, an attempt that failed because Holden could not find the strength within himself to love society unquestionably. At the point of writing The Catcher in the Rye, Salinger was not influenced by Eastern philosophies and there are no specific references to Eastern philosophies in The Catcher and the Rye, furthering the supposition that Holden’s lack of Eastern and Taoist insight encumbers him in the story as such it does  Salinger in his life. It is after The Catcher and the Rye and with the increased influence of Eastern thought in Salinger’s life that Salinger’s characters find contentment in an unsatisfactory society and become the accomplished saints of the Taoist lifestyle. 

In the character of Holden, we see that because of Holden’s inherent misgivings, misgivings that may be reflective of Salinger’s own failings, Salinger fails to develop him as a saint. Salinger was young in both life and  career during the writing of The Catcher and the Rye, and had not yet removed himself from the suffocation of society and especially the pressure of the publishing business. However, with the characters of Teddy and Seymour, the responsibility of their failed sanctification lies exactly with this suffocating, relentlessly intrusive society and not with inherent flaws of their own characters. Seymour has attained what can at least be recognized as an impressive measure of sainthood; well-versed in Eastern and Western philosophies, Seymour can be accurately connected to the Taoist train of thought because Taoism is referenced most often in stories concerning him and other Glass family characters. Seymour can also be described as living the Taoist life style, donning “no grievous faults, no vices, no meannesses that can be listed”[19]. He approaches humanity with a deaf ear, muted voice, and a constant grin like that of Raise High the Roof Beam Carpenter’s “happy man”[20]. Throughout the Glass narratives, Seymour acts unobtrusively, often conducting himself in accordance with “the affairs of nonaction [and carrying] out doctrine without words”[21].  The intentions of his actions seem obscure sometimes because the acts themselves seem nonexistent. For example, whenever Seymour critiques Buddy’s writings, he has Buddy read them to him while he lays on the floor and would then “jot down a few notes on a piece of paper or a shirt cardboard and either leave it on [Buddy’s} bed or at [his] place at the dinner table or (very rarely) send it to me through the U.S. mail”[22]. By conducting himself in such a self-effacing manner, Seymour manages to convey his criticisms without conflict to the receiver because he simply poses- not forces- his opinion.

Seymour’s inaction allows him to be an esteemed role model for society, so much so that he seems transcendently detached from society. His apparent transcendence is portrayed by the muted affects of society, such as “what [his] mother called Food Made by Dirty Men That Never Even Wash Their Hands”[23], food that gives Buddy a persistent case of acne but was noted to have no negative effect on Seymour. Society seems unable to taint Seymour, however, this is because society and are incompatible; just like the numerous suits Seymour tries to wear, nothing about society “ever fitted him properly”[24]. Perhaps such sentiments of incompatibility reflect Salinger’s own feelings of incongruity; he never completed a degree, found it difficult to settle down romantically, and despised the intrusion of publisher’s opinions on his art. Salinger, like Seymour, was in constant conflict with society, but unlike Seymour, or Teddy, was unable to emotionally transcend it without withdrawing into seclusion. Seymour, though, tries to live in the world because he seeks to establish harmony with society just as he has established harmony with the Tao. He tries to accommodate himself to society as the Taoist does to the Tao. Just as the Tao is universal force that was “formlessly fashioned…[that] existed before heaven and earth….dependent on nothing, unchanging, all pervading, unfailing; ‘Way’ is the by-name that we give it”[25], the current of society are self-forming, self-perpetuating, and pervade the individual. Unfortunately,  because the Tao underlies all of existence, being in such deep connection with it makes it difficult to exist in a society where the surrounding beings do not. In order to be pragmatic (to fit into society with ease and maintain that deep connections with the Tao), the Taoist saint must condescend to society with humility and patience. It is why Seymour chooses to enter the “institution of marriage”[26] and “be happy happy happy [with his] beautiful Muriel”[27]. It is an attempt to marry into society and achieve a  balance between the world in which Seymour lives  and the call of the universal Tao to flow with the distasteful aspects of society and human nature. Desiring to reconcile with society, he is happy with Muriel, but remains wishing that “she [like society] could only be happier with [him]”[28].  His marriage becomes a failed attempt that only results in an unbearable emptiness, for though Seymour is faster than Buddy(“the Fastest Boy Runner in the World”[29]) he was still panting after he caught up to him mid-race. Seymour, though able to transcend most human frailties, is still human, and thus vulnerable to overpowering, emotional discontent. His suicide in “A Perfect Day for Bananafish” does not simply represent an escape from the world, but implies the vicious irreconcilability which exists between him and society. Throughout the rest of the Glass narratives his suicide is regarded as a failure (for Franny does not want his sister to succumb to such an urge) on behalf of Seymour, but also as a laudable cry against society of which Seymour had no choice but to commit; society is to blame for Seymour’s suicide, not Seymour. Its persecution is evidenced in his encounter with the woman in the elevator in “A Perfect Day for Bananafish” who was a “God-damned sneak” [30] blatantly staring at his feet. She illustrates society’s tendency to prejudicially view Seymour as abnormal. The woman’s staring suggests that she views him as unusual but is too “phony” to be sincere as Seymour wants her to be. Seymour is annoyed with such insincerity and society’s “Bananafish tendencies”, the tendency to gorge on material goods to the point of spiritual incapacitation. He calls the day he commits suicide “a perfect day for Bananafish” because he realizes that society is presently overridden with persons who gorge themselves consistently on futile pursuits and only develop an empty sense of worth founded in physical perfection, cheap entertainment, and material wealth. He either grows despondent over his own Bananafish transformation or the engulfing swarm of Bananafish he has coexisted with since his marriage to Muriel. He is pushed by this unhappiness to the point of suicide- his only escape. Though clearly saintly, society’s pressure is too potent for Seymour. His suicide felt like the only choice left to him, for he knew he could never be reconciled with such persons who gorge themselves to the point of  emptiness, or love himself if he acted similarly. .  

Unlike Seymour, who is indirectly persecuted by society, Teddy is a character who is deliberately persecuted by society, but is later on the condition upon which  society comes to regret its patterns of  persecution. Though he mostly reflects Hindu thought because of his persistent reference to reincarnation, Teddy also embodies the Taoist saint . At the age of ten he is a precocious, Buddha-like figure that has dissolved his ego so thoroughly he holds no sentimentality toward man whatsoever on the grounds that emotion “is too unreliable”[31].  Living with a intemperate sister and two constantly quarrelling parents, Teddy is incredibly detached and emotionless in his approach to society, indicating that he has managed to separate his ego from his environment and withhold himself from acting and aggravating the world around him by imposing his sentimental judgments. He sees no point in “sticking one’s emotions in things that have no emotions”, like the weather,  or death and God; “If I were God, I certainly wouldn’t want people to love me sentimentally [he says]. It’s too unreliable”. Such objectivity resembles that of Seymour, who was able to detach himself so cleanly from the pain of his broken leg that he felt no pain at all (“Hapworth 16 1924”). The only emotion Teddy expresses is a measure of despondency at having  been seduced by  a woman in a past life, for her allure has arrested him in the circle of reincarnation. This incident reflects the detrimental effects society has on the Taoist’s plight, that if approached with the trappings of the ego, the saint cannot reject “extremes…excess…[or] extravagance”[32]. His fall from grace in his previous life echoes the fatal fall into the pool that he suffers at either his or  his sister’s hand. His younger sister, disdainful of him for what appears to be nothing other than childish spite, represents the persecution society commits upon figures like Teddy and Seymour. She resembles the jealous figures of society, who look upon Teddy’s purity and wisdom with ignorant jealousy. She may be covetous of Teddy’s saintly ability to escape “finite dimensions”[33] and see that “everything is God”[34], that stopping to absorb a simple moment of reality is to find spiritual peace. Unable to bring herself to admiration of such rational wisdom though, it is suggested that Teddy’s sister accidentally kills him by pushing him into a empty pool, only to recognize the horror of what she’s done with an “all piercing sustained scream”[35] of regret. In an ironic twist, her scream proves that Teddy has indeed served as a model for the world, for his murder reveals to society the horror of its own actions and narrow-mindedness.

Thus far, the characters examined in this paper have possessed either great potential for Taoist sanctification, or great skill as Taoist saints, but only Franny and Zooey (who are students of Seymour) seem to become and remain truly holy in the Taoist sense. Moreover, they are the only characters able to reconcile with society and be reconciled with by society. At the beginning of their story, Zooey seems to have the best grasp on the Taoist philosophy. Described by Buddy Glass as a “‘sought after’”[36] young television actor, Zooey is one of the few characters who successfully balances himself between society and sainthood. Most significantly contributing to this balancing act is his employment as an actor, for the pursuit of such a profession is considered by Seymour to be a function required of all those who wish to coexist in a society that leaves them unhappy; acting requires detachment, and detachment is what “makes an actor in the first place”[37]. An actor must be able to abandon emotional anchors and focus solely on their performance, just as a saint must abandon all desires so as to  focus on being a model of righteousness for mankind. Franny, however, has decided to give up acting - even though she’s very good at it - because she misinterprets it as phony and therefore unbeneficial in her struggle for spiritual fulfillment. She instead strives for spiritual contentment through the unceasing repetition of the Jesus prayer, a prayer that Zooey will claim is intrinsically useless. It is Franny’s attempt to mold Jesus to her liking. Zooey certainly sympathizes with Franny and her inability to love a Jesus she “didn’t approve of”; he sympathizes with her desire to follow a religion that doesn’t discriminate against anyone or thing, but disapproves that she morphs Jesus into “St. Francis of Assisi to make him more lovable”[38]. This, he claims,  is making her more spiritually miserable, for her ego is trying to make God something he is not. God is in everything, Zooey says, from a cup of “consecrated chicken soup” [39] to the most sincere prayer; he exists as is and to change him is to fight the harmony of the world. The Tao is the “origin” of all that exists, and so all that exists is, as Teddy puts it, an aspect of God himself. Zooey recognizes that praying the Jesus prayer won’t help Franny because she’s too emotionally attached to it; “detachment, buddy, and only detachment… ‘cessation from all hankerings’”[40] is what frees the spirit from the ego, and allows the soul to live in and love the world without debilitating discrimination according. In the beginning of the story, Franny is so angry with the world she unfairly criticizes its “unskilled laughter” without realizing that such judgments make her miserable. The solution he suggests to her is to put aside the futile impositions of her ego and “shoot for some kind of perfection on [her] own terms[41], to be a model instead of imposing onto others “what’s none of [her] business”[42].   Franny’s and Zooey’s roles as saints are to be actors, to approach society with an attitude of redeeming love that renders them role models to all mankind, but to act in accord with society in the spirit of toleration . As actors, they work for an audience of “morons”[43] but still realize that it is their job to “shine their shoes for the Fat Lady” for “there isn’t anyone out there who isn’t Seymour’s Fat Lady”[44], who isn’t undeserving of love and their shining example. Therefore, all persons should be loved despite their moronic ways. Furthermore, Zooey says that the Fat Lady is “Christ himself”[45], implying that the Tao is present in all humans and that by acting Franny will fulfill herself more completely than in the ceaseless blubbering of a prayer to Christ. He claims it is futile to recite the Jesus prayer and expect some mystical experience to evolve from its incessant chanting because the prayer requires great spiritual investment as well as constant repetition. With Zooey’s guidance, Franny realizes that acting is spiritually strengthening, practical, honorable and the most virtuous solution to her spiritual discontent. Realizing this, she lies down on the couch “as if all of what little of much wisdom there is in the world were suddenly hers…she [falls] into a sleep, dreamless sleep…smiling at the ceiling”[46]. Like Zooey, Franny can use her acting skills to do what they as children did on the radio show “It’s a Wise Child”- “expound”[47]: guide mankind by example.

           Eastern Philosophy has a heavy presence throughout Salinger’s works, from the quotes on Buddy’s wall in Franny and Zooey, the structure of the Glass children’s education, to the idea of reincarnation presented in “Teddy”.  Chinese Taoism gives them the tools and guidance to love society without judgment and cope with others by being a model of virtue than an enforcer of righteousness. The Tao itself can be easily compared to the Greek translation of Christ written in the Gospel of John, logos: both are “the first principle of existence…[the] unity [that] lies beneath the surface, for it is a unity of diverse and conflicting opposites…[in which] the Logos [the Tao] maintains the equilibrium of the universe at every moment”[48]. The saints which Salinger creates (Teddy, Seymour, Franny, Zooey and too some extent Holden), see, or must learn to see, the world without the corruption of the ego and therefore must be harmony with the Tao . The constructions of Salinger’s characters are revolutionary, because their Eastern spirituality and thought complements their role as citizens in Western society by helping them to reconcile with society by showing how the ego disrupts us from accepting society. The ego is not a part of the Tao, but is an individual’s desire to control and judge, clouding his sense of perception. Seymour and Teddy are able to dissolve their egos but remain either so disturbed by society or so violated that their witness to the Tao goes unnoticed, even repulsed by society. Franny and Zooey, however, are able to overcome society by acting as if they are happy, thus enabling themselves to move amongst society without outer conflict so as to induce inner peace. Only in Holden does one of Salinger’s characters fail in becoming a model for Taoist saintliness, for he is not able to dissolve his ego, and therefore unable to love society without thinking of his own opinion first. Yet even in Holden’s story, the message of Taoism is implied through Holden’s failed attempt at sainthood by depicting the opposite attitudes of a saint, and providing for the reader an Eastern solution to the shortcomings of Western society. It is implied that the journeys of Salinger’s characters reflect Salinger’s own journey for sainthood and spiritual contentment. Caught between “a Chinese restaurant and a Kosher delicatessen” like the barbershop where Buddy and Seymour get their hair cuts, Salinger himself walks the path between Western and Eastern society, seeking to pacify his discontent with Western culture with Eastern methods, only to, in the end, retreat from society altogether, like Seymour does, by moving to Northern new Hampshire. Perhaps he felt he had no choice, and reclusion was the best path to unimpeded fulfillment; or perhaps Salinger was too weak to reconcile with society as Franny and Zooey do. Whatever his motivation, Salinger has nonetheless subtly given to his audience Taoist insight. By being a role model through art he has divulged a compromise between Western and Eastern society, between man and society, and man and himself.  Now we too may fall, like Franny, into a peaceful rest.



Saint Anselm College

Manchester, NH

About the Author


Works Cited

Alexander, Paul. Salinger: A Biography. Renaissance Books. Los Angeles, CA, 1999.

Baumbach, Jonathan. “The Saint as a Young Man: A Reappraisal of The Catcher in the Rye. Article from: Critical Essays on Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye. Ed. Joel Salzberg. G.K. Hall & Co. Boston, MA. 1990.

Damascene, Hiermonk. Christ the Eternal Tao. Valaam Books, Platina, CA, 2002.

Salinger, Jerome D. Catcher in the Rye. Little, Brown Books, Boston, 1951.

                “Teddy” from Nine Stories. Little, Brown Books, Boston 1953.

                “Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters.” Little, Brown Books. 1959.

                Seymour an Introduction.” Little Brown Books, 1959.

                Franny and Zooey. Little Brown Books, Boston, 1961.

Tzu, Lao. Trans: Victor H. Mair. Tao Te Ching. Bantam Books, 1990.

Welch, Holmes. Taoism: The Parting of the Way. Beacon Press, Boston, 1965.



[1] Tao Te Ching, Lao Tzu, p. 17.

[2] Taoism: The Parting of the Way, Welch, p. 22.

[3] Baumbuch, p. 56.

[4] Salinger: A Biography, Alexander, p. 180.

[5] Seymour: An Introduction, Salinger, p. 209.

[6] Baumbach, p. 60.

[7] The Catcher in the Rye, Salinger, p. 212.

[8] p 13.

[9] p. 213.

[10] p. 213.

[11] p. 213.

[12] p. 73.

[13] p. 214.

[14] Taoism: The Parting of the Way, Welch, p. 21.

[15] p. 24.

[16] The Catcher in the Rye.

[17] Baumbach, p. 62.

[18] p. 146.

[19]Seymour: An Introduction”, Salinger, p. 108.

[20] Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters”, Salinger, p. 91.

[21] Mair, p. 60.

[22]Seymour: An Introduction”, Salinger, p. 153.

[23]Seymour: An Introduction”, p. 184.

[24] p. 187.

[25] p. 53.

[26] “Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters”, p. 71.

[27]  p. 65.

[28] p. 71.

[29]Seymour: An Introduction”, p. 210.

[30] “A Perfect Day for Bananafish”, Salinger, p. 25.

[31] “Teddy”,  Salinger, p. 285.

[32] Tao Te Ching, p. 94.

[33] “Teddy”, p. 294.

[34] p. 289.

[35] p. 302.

[36] Franny and Zooey, Salinger, p. 52.

[37] p. 198.

[38] p. 166.

[39] p. 196.

[40] p. 198.

[41] Franny and Zooey.

[42] p. 162.

[43] p. 200.

[44] p. 201.

[45] p. 202.

[46] p. 202.

[47] p. 140.

[48] Christ the Eternal Tao, Damascene, p. 31.