[Buddha-l] Re: Of Buddha, Miracles, and Ferry Rides

[Joy Vriens]

Richard P. Hayes wrote:

> My only purpose was to think about things by writing about them. Then I
> had all this writing on my hands.

That is what came across, and I don't understand that Vladimir failed to 
see that. It was a series of essays and it's entirely legitmate to write 
essays about *Western* Buddhism. Essays like novels are a typically 
Western form of expression of freedom (see Kundera's l'art du roman). 
Within the safe boundaries of an essay or novel one is free to imagine 
and think. And any personal experience mixed in with makes it only more 
alive and pertinent ... and Western if it's written by a Westerner.

> What I found compelling about his review was the comparison of Michael
> Moore to Noam Chomsky. One expects Michael Moore to make all kinds of
> wild accusations and to shoot from the hip, and perhaps even enjoys it,
> but one expects more carefully argued and well-documented claims from a
> professor at MIT. Similarly, Vladimir apparently expects wild
> accusations and shooting from the hip from some Buddhists, but not from
> a professor of Buddhist studies.

It's a good thing the era of overspecialisation comes to an end and 
we're going back to a more interdisciplinary approach (or is the 
pendulum swinging back yet again?). It's a good thing imo that a 
professor of Buddhist studies and a Buddhist practitioner, or even a 
non-buddhist non-practitioner for that matter do meet. What is wrong 
with a melange de genres?

> Vladimir pay have been shooting from
> the hip when he wrote that, but I think he hit the target. So perhaps
> the mistake I made was not to write the essays and publish them as a
> book, but to do all that under my real name. If I had published the book
> under the name Wild Dick Haze, then no one would have expected it to
> have the gravitas they expect from a professor.

Complying with the expectations of others must be a very hard thing to 
do. I wouldn't be liked to be forced to do so. The charm of your book 
and of a list like this one is that people don't always (perhaps a 
euphemism) have the gravitas one expects from professors.

I don't mean to rub it in, but you not only failed Vlad's expectations 
as a professor, but also as a practitioner:

"A sentence of such anger and bile makes one wonder what it is that 
Hayes has learned about being a Buddhist."

and

even simpy as a mature person (middle-aged man):

"And for a middle-aged man who at this point in his life had studied 
Indian philosophy for ten years, earned a PhD from the Department of 
Sanskrit and Indian Studies at the University of Toronto and was 
teaching Sanskrit language and Indian Buddhist philosophy, this is one 
angry, strident writer who seems to have missed some important points 
about Buddhist practice, such as compassion and understanding for one’s 
fellow humans and their frailties." (smoke must have been coming out 
from his ears at this point)

I don't know how one can conclude from a series of essays that someone 
lacks "compassion and understanding for one’s fellow humans and their 
frailties". And I am astonished, though not excessively, that a well 
schooled Westerner, and a practising Buddhist at that, can feel angry 
and desperate when reading an essay.

> This
> computer program then gave a reading assignment a difficulty score. The
> idea writing style, it said, was aimed at a reader with a grade nine
> education. It then computed my writing style to be something that a
> student with a grade 27 education would feel comfortable reading. I took
> the hint and started writing shorter sentences, such as the 125-word
> masterpiece that Vladimir cited. (It was, you'll have to admit, a damn
> well-written sentence.)

A style is a style. If everybody had the same style it would simply be 
etiquette.

>> just like the bit where he writes "I must confess that I had trouble 
>>finishing this book and many times thought of throwing it down in anger 
>>and despair".

> Moi aussi! Vlad's reaction is just about exactly the reaction I
> appreciate in a reader. If people don't come away feeling a little angry
> and personally insulted by an essay, I figure the essayist only made a
> half-hearted effort.

Exactly, what a compliment! "throwing it down", I am jealous. Damn you 
did it again...

>>Admit it Richard, you wrote it yourself...

> I have no problem admitting that I wrote it. I just wonder how wise it
> was to publish it under my own name. In the future I think I'll publish
> such essays under an assumed name. I've been toying with using either
> James Peavler, Joy Vriens or Joanna Kirkpatrick.

I don't whether it is wise, but it shows you are a mensch out of one 
piece taking responsibility for all his manifestations. But being a 
mensch doesn't necessarily guarantee one of having good reviews.

Joy