Essay on 'Cranes' Short Story

Have you ever felt that your opinions and beliefs oppose the wider set of beliefs held by your society? In the narrative “Shakespeare In The Bush”, Laura Bohannan explores this exact topic — whether the opinions humans hold are universal. Bohannan argues human nature is universal throughout the world in Shakespeare’s ‘Hamlet’. Bohannan gets a chance to confirm this idea during her stay with the Tiv tribe in Africa, due to the society being a drastic contrast to her modern setting. However, Laura Bohannan did not successfully prove that Shakespeare was universally intelligible with her with the Tiv. She figured that the Tiv's interpretation of Hamlet is not connected to human nature, rather the differences in their culture and traditions were what had impacted their analysis of Hamlet. In both of the short stories, “Cranes”, written by Hwang Sun-Won and translated by Peter H.Lee and “Saboteur”, by Ha Jin, the authors address Bohannan’s concept, focusing on whether this notion exists within an authoritarian government. In “Cranes”, there is a conflict between the political systems of communism and republicanism the individuals in the country must decide which they pledge complete allegiance to. “Saboteur” takes place in China, directly after the Cultural Revolution enforced by Chairman Mao, who advocated for communism and the abolition of capitalist beliefs. This led to the corruption of the nation and the creation of an unjust society due to the rules and regulations enforced on the Republic Of China. The notion “Shakespeare In The Bush” made regarding human nature being the same throughout the world is inaccurate since the literary works of “Cranes” and “Saboteur” both demonstrate the towering influence the government and political figures attempt to have on the perspective of their citizens, in the process they contrast each other as well.

In the text “Cranes,” written by Hwang Sun-Won and translated by Peter H. Lee, the author dismisses the notion that the opinions held by individuals are universal when he addresses Song Sam’s gradual defiance of the Republican state of South Korea. The author connects the present-day situation and the past of Song-Sam and Tokchae, by signifying that they were childhood friends now turned enemies due to the consequences of the Korean War.

The two have spent valuable time with one another along the 38th parallel, which now serves to split Song-sam and Tok-chae apart, as both a physical and emotional barrier forms between the two. These barriers are formed during the political and territorial divide between North and South, as Song-sam flees to South Korea’s republic and Tok-chae remains with the communist North. Korea’s division into two Koreas is responsible for the inescapable circumstances that led to Song-sam and Tok-chae’s current situation. However, these barriers are broken when the two are face to face with one another, as Tok-chae has been arrested and taken by Song-sam for execution.

Since pledging allegiance requires one to follow the jurisdiction of the government, this begs the question of whether the ideas of individualism, moral obligation, and personal responsibility are altered under this rule. Hwang Sun-Won answers this question when he writes, “ ‘So you managed to kill many, eh? ‘Song-sam felt his heart becoming clear from within as if an obstruction had been removed. ‘If you were vice-chairman of the Communist League, why didn’t you run? You must have been lying low with a secret mission.’ Tok-chae did not answer.

‘Speak up, what is your mission?’ Tok-chae kept walking. Tok-chae is hiding something, Song-sam thought. He wanted to take a good look at him, but Tok-chae would not turn his averted face” (Hwang Sun-Won pg.2). In this scene, the readers can sense the development of emotional tension between Tok-Chae and Song-Sam which was not present before this encounter. The people of Korea were given a decision to either stay North or to stay South, but that decision led to following a new government and a new ideology that was enforced onto its citizens. That very government is what provoked Song-Sam to say the things that he said, revealing how his ideas and claims are far from the truth. The Korean War had split two groups of people apart and Song-Sam's ideology was seemingly transformed psychologically during his time under the South Korean government. Why else would someone treat his childhood friend in such a contrasting manner? This scene takes place during the rising actions of the story and compares Song-Sam’s past self to his current transformed state under the government and how one can appear to be altered by an individual or group of individuals, but that can be far from the truth. It serves as an example of behaviorism which is altering the beliefs of a group of people through the state of conditioning. This is shown through propaganda and regulations. This effectively allows a government to influence the opinions held by an audience, in this case, its citizens, without them ever becoming aware of this. Despite this, author Hwang Sun-Won addresses Song-Sam resisting the influence of the government and upholding the values he had always possessed, “This used to be the neutralized zone along the Thirty-eighth Parallel. The cranes were still living here, as before, while the people were all gone… Only then did Tok-chae catch on. He started crawling among the weeds. A couple of Tanjong cranes soared high into the clear blue autumn sky, fluttering their huge wings” (Hwang Sun-Won pg.4). Hwang Sun-won utilizes this moment to convey the realization that Song-sam undergoes regarding his stance on the Korean War. Song-sam wasn’t part of a government that was intended to serve the best interests of its citizens. He didn’t realize, as Franklin D. Roosevelt once said, ‘was an alien power over us’ (Franklin D., Roosevelt). The resolution of the story is one many expect, Tok-chae is set free by Song-sam and is not at risk of being executed. However, Song-Sam has become an important symbol in this narrative, a crane. Since Tok-chae and Song-sam’s childhood, the cranes have continued to remain in their ponds, unaffected by the events of the Korean War. The cranes have maintained their behavior and instincts. Paralleling Song-sam, who in reality has never changed as a result of the Korean War, and his ideas, mindset, and his values, have never truly faded away. Song-sam doesn’t realize this till the end of the story and instead of feeling guilty for acting in this manner, he proves through his actions that he is still the same person Tok-chae knew since childhood.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

“Cranes”, describes how to the political schism has created a society that establishes control that allows them to alter the mindset and actions of an individual, with a different setting that can be introduced resulting in varying experiences for the individuals and the society. Ha Jin characterizes the transgression of the Chinese government laws and regulations through the use of the intellectual Mr.Chiu, who serves as evidence as to why Laura Bohannan's notation to the claim about universality in humans is unfactual. The current setting that Mr.Chiu happens to be in is the politically corrupt China, under the authority of Chairman Mao.

Communism is intended to create a society with equal political status among its citizens, but within China, however, it is far from achieving this goal. Mr.Chiu and his wife learn this during their stay at Muji when they encounter this corruption when they are simply waiting at the train station to leave for their honeymoon. Ha Jin, the Chinese American writer, characterizes the corrupt nature of the political system with “In the center of the square stood a concrete statue of Chairman Mao...As they were talking, the stout policeman at the next table stood up and threw a bowl of tea in their direction. Both Mr. Chiu's and his bride's sandals were wet instantly. Mr. Chiu got to his feet and said out loud, ‘Comrade policeman, why did you do this?’ He stretched out his right foot to show the wet sandal...With a wave of his hand, the man said to the young fellow, ‘Let's get hold of him’ ” (Ha Jin 4). Mao and his police officials were unabashedly corrupt individuals, who served the purpose of upholding the social order Mao created himself. The use of Chairman Mao’s statue is significant, as it symbolizes the absolute political authority of Chairman Mao and how his corruption is shown through the policemen.

Almost as if Chairman Mao’s influence is evident all over China and his statue in the center square assures that. No matter where you are in China, you can never really escape from the control of its government and the policemen who represent it. This situation is a clear example of irony because Mr.Chiu and his wife are simply waiting near the train station to leave their honeymoon from Muji. Yet, the police officers who accuse Song-sam of disrupting order, are the ones doing so in the first place. Communism resulted in very few individual rights for citizens, which meant that the police officers took advantage of this and ended up being the ones who broke them the most. Mr. Chiu's special character role as an intellectual is characterized when Ha-jin states, “But I told the truth!”Anger flared up in Mr.Chiu.' Your police station owes me an apology. My train ticket has expired, my new leather sandals are ruined, and I am late for a conference in the provincial capital. You must compensate me for the damage and losses. Don’t mistake me for a common citizen who would tremble when you sneeze. I’m a scholar, a philosopher, and an expert in dialectical materialism.” (Ha Jin 6). Mr.Chiu’s emotional state has drastically deteriorated, as Mr.Chiu wonders why his status of education is not allowing him to negotiate with the officials. In our everyday lives, we often view education as being directly correlated to a high degree of respect and admiration. This degree of respect towards an individual such as Mr.Chiu is nowhere to be seen in this conversation. Communism here is shown to lack a majority of human rights that are crucial aspects of modern Western democracy, such as the citizen’s freedom of speech and expression. The act of expression is the key defining trait of an intellectual such as Mr.Chiu. Instead, the government chooses to censor Mr.Chiu's capabilities to express his extensive knowledge ironically. The Chinese government would have had difficulties ruling an intellectual compared to the less educated, so they censored Mr.Chiu to ensure he was unable to influence the uneducated. This irony also helps to effectively build up a feeling of hopelessness for Mr.Chiu, as he questions whether he can truly escape from his imprisonment. Ha Jin evaluates how censorship and corruption of a seemingly positive political system are utilized to lower the status of their citizens, in this case, Mr.Chiu. Ha Jin utilizes the setting of the Cultural Revolution and the symbolism of power to convey the extent of Mao’s influence and power over its citizens, developing a contrasting viewpoint to disapprove of Bohanan’s notion that human nature is universal.

The governmental authority present in the works of authors Ha Jin and Hwang Sun-Won helps contribute to a different message and theme for the respective stories. From early to modern history, there have been several variations of an authoritarian government. For instance, the absolute authoritarianism of Kim Jong-un of North Korea and French King Louis XIV, who had said the words 'L'etat c'est moi' or ‘I am the state’. Both authors incorporate the governmental systems and how they impact the protagonists, Song-sam and Mr.Chiu, directly. Yet, each of the respective stories differs from the perspective of the main characters and the importance of the individual is interconnected to the setting of the respective stories. However, Hwang Sun-Won demonstrates highlights Song-Sam’s role in the Korean War as he states, “ ‘Anyway, it’s strange you did not run away.’ “I tried to escape. They said that once the South invaded, no man would be spared. So men between seventeen and forty were forcibly taken to the North. I thought of evacuating, even if I had to carry my father on my back...So Song-sam left alone. Roaming about the strange streets and villages in the South” (Hwang Sun-Won pg.3). On the other hand, Ha Jin contrasts Mr.Chiu’s role in society with Song-sam when he describes, “ ‘Stop bluffing us,’ the donkey-faced man broke in. 'We have seen a lot of your kind. We can easily prove you are guilty. Here are some of the statements given by the eyewitnesses. Mr. Chiu was dazed to see the different handwriting, which all stated that he had shouted in the square to attract attention and refused to obey the police. He gave out a faint moan” (Ha-Jin pg.6). The characterization of the protagonists of these works of literature has a direct connection to the historical conflict being discussed in the story. Song-sam is a public peace corp officer in South Korea and Mr.Chiu is an intellectual after the cultural revolution, meaning he is under the group of people Chairman Mao wanted to keep away from the general public. Song-Sam is describing the political turmoil that the country is in and how individuals such as Song-Sam are debating the consequences of joining either side of the war. Song-sam is simply an everyday man in terms of the war and the control of the Republican authoritarian government is directed towards all of those who choose to side with South Korea. This means Song-sam doesn’t necessarily have a unique perspective compared to the other soldiers in the Korean War. The emotional distance between him and Tok-chae has most likely occurred with many other soldiers with their friends and family, instead, Hwang-sun-won chooses Song-sam and Tok-chae’s account to demonstrate the impact of the Korean War on family and friends. A key distinction author Ha-Jin made from other characters is that Song-sam is likely the only one of these soldiers who has defied the South Korean government in such a manner. On the other hand, Mr. Chiu is clearly under the influence of a corrupt government that controls its citizens with rules and regulations. Mr.Chiu has a direct connection to the historical conflict of the story, as individuals such as Mr.Chiu were meant to be cleared off during the Cultural Revolution. Rather than the account of the everyday man, Mr.Chiu’s perspective is uniquely tied to a certain group of individuals, which the government specifically targets to eliminate. This gives Mr.Chiu a superior connection to the setting than Song-sam, despite both settings being crucial to the development of the protagonist during this historical conflict. Both ‘Saboteur’ and ‘Cranes’ deal with the extent of government influence on human society, however, they connect to the theme of the universality of the character’s actions and mindsets under these settings in contrasting fashion.

A government has a responsibility to fulfill the needs of its citizens and in both of these stories, the government is enforcing values and regulations that the citizens have no choice but to comply with. Laura Bohannan, writer of “Shakespeare In The Bush” questions whether human nature is universal, which connects with the idea of whether an authoritarian government can have complete influence over the mindset of a nation. We learn in “Cranes” and “Saboteur” that both of these stories demonstrate that the ideas and opinions one holds can never truly be altered by a government despite its strength. Wherever one is, they should remind themselves that any sort of political authority has the moral duty to provide just laws and regulations for its citizens. One should never have their personal and moral code be altered by any outside force, otherwise, our free will is limited to whatever the alien force above us decides. In many cases, we can see that this type of government fails. This is a world of injustice and tyranny, and an authoritarian government style does nothing but exasperate the problem.