Archive for July, 2007
Males Are Still Hunters Today
Forward
Like all other short stories I wrote previously, the first draft is not entirely satisfactory. But I post it here on my blog (http://www.beyondkonspiracy.com/category/short-stories-fiction/) (or print and pass it out to a couple of people) so that I can get suggestions and feedback; I think that’s a more effective way to develop my stories than just to re-read and edit by myself. I am trying something new beginning this story by the way. I have not been able to write good openings and endings, so this time, I decided to underline the part that basically introduces what the story is about and the part that concludes the story. I hope that this will help readers to understand what I try to convey and to give me input on how I should modify these two parts and other parts to improve the story.
Chapter 1: Male Dominance Is The Central Theme
Chapter 2: Male Dominance In U.S.
Chapter 3: Alex Vesnik
Chapter 4: Male Dominance In Japan
Chapter 5: Yu, Alex’s Boyfriend
Chapter 6: Male Dominance In India
Chapter 7: Hostility toward India
Chapter 8: Dinner
Chapter 9: Political Situation in 2006 And How New York Daily News Ran Its Business
Chapter 10: Termination Of Contract
Chapter 11: Come Back
Chapter 12: She Will Carry On
Chapter 13: The Next Step
Short Stories (Fiction) | 31.07.2007 10:27 | No Comments
Chapter 1: Male Dominance Is The Central Theme
Chairs lined up, about thirty or so, on the second floor of ‘Bay Area Books and Gifts’ in downtown San Francisco; it was one of the biggest bookstores in town. A young woman sat on one of chairs and contemplated how she was going to give her speech tonight. She was on her book release tour and she was going to speak about her latest book here in an hour. She already visited a dozen cities around the country and she gave the same speech, so it was not that she was worried about getting stuck in the middle of it or answering questions from the audience; she memorized virtually every word of the speech by now and she could also anticipate what questions were being asked. However, she did not feel that she was able to capture the audience so far. Given the rather extravagant idea of hers, she spoke in the monotonic tone in order to not make her look disturbed, but she felt that she should speak a little more enthusiastically today.
She was not a feminist but she found that the central theme of her writing was paramount. She wanted to speak out and get her message across. Lack of protest and criticism against existing social structures around the world frustrated and aggravated her. This was why she picked the male dominance the central theme. She understood that she lacked depth analyses; she also admitted that she came up with piquant ideas and stories to sell her books. But she also found it imperative that she took a part in discussions of social theories. When social theories were discussed, the history only mentioned names of geniuses; their contribution was great and she did not argue against that, but she argued that it was just a part of the development. Some theories were introduced melodramatically, but they facilitated debates and discussions. Subsequently, changes and modifications were made in these theories. All these were just a part of the development of social theories, in which she was taking a part.
At 7:00 pm, the book release event started and the storeowner introduced the speaker to the audience. She stood up, walked up to the podium and started her speech.
Short Stories (Fiction) | 31.07.2007 10:20 | 1 Comment
Chapter 2: Male Dominance In U.S.
”For two million years, we, humans, were hunter-gathers; in academic terms, there were the Paleolithic period and, following that period, the Mesolithic period. In these two periods, we hunted animals, fished and gathered plants and seeds to obtain food to live. In the subsequent Neolithic period, we started agriculture; the period dates back twelve thousand years or so. There was more development after the Neolithic period, but the point is this; for the vast majority of the human history, that is, more than 99% of the entire human history, we were hunter-gathers. And who were hunters? Males. So, you can imagine that males still have the hunter mentality even today.” Her latest novel’s central theme was that today’s world was by and large male dominant and it was the root cause of variety of social problems ranging from domestic abuse, overpopulation, pollution and warfare. While she made a number of friends since she moved to U.S. and liked many things that the country offered, she could not help being critical of its politics; it wasn’t that she disliked it here but it was that she could observe so many social problems that Americans did not or refused to observe. Their ignorance often made her feel frustrated and aggravated; she decided to express that feeling today. She continued, “Let’s take an example found in this country. U.S. Businessmen, CEOs and multi-billionaires have this ‘hunter’ mentality. They love to call themselves ‘Captain of industry’, ‘Business leader’, ‘Visionary’ and ‘Philanthropist’, but who are they really? They’re robber barons. The term originates in German and it refers to feudal lords who abused their power to collect toll fees from merchant ships going through Rhine River in Germany back in twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The term was revived two centuries ago in this country and it referred to businessmen like Carnegie, Rockefeller, Vanderbilt and J. P. Morgan who abused their power, practiced anti-competitive tactics and amassed enormous financial wealth. The term is still relevant today. So called business leaders in U.S. behave just like hunters. They attack, capture, defend, round up their targets, capture them as prisoners and eventually massacre them probably not literally but figuratively; their practices are clearly anti-competitive and they are stifling the development of this country.” She felt relieved as she stated this. She expressed an idea that Americans did not come to possess; she observed U.S. objectively and criticized it as an outsider. Though her English did not have any accent, the audience should have known by now that she was from Russia originally because the book tour’s brochure clearly advertised it. But they must have also felt that she was not an American who assumed America was good, moral and just. There was the sense of peace in her because she was being a little more expressive today and she kept going. ”We should look at a little more specific example. Healthcare in this country is a total disaster; it costs you hundreds of dollars every month to just get coverage. Even if you have a proper coverage, if you get sick, you can go bankrupt because healthcare coverage providers do everything they can to prevent you from obtaining the necessary cost to treat your illness and recover. They lobby congress so that there will never be a public healthcare system in this country. They hire a number of lawyers to ‘attack’ consumers; they ‘kill off’ competitions so that they can keep their market shares. All these are typical male behaviors. As a result, we suffer. Male dominant society, U.S.; this society makes us all suffer.“ She took a couple of more examples and she also amplified her theory. And then, he concluded the first part of her speech by saying, ” American men. They’re essentially these predatory hunters; they hunt for resources and financial wealth. They hunt for women as well; more specifically, they hunt for their flesh. They hunt for whatever we possess. And these men are American men.”
Short Stories (Fiction) | 31.07.2007 10:19 | 1 Comment
Chapter 3: Alex Vesnik
The speaker, Alex Vesnik, was originally from Russia. Initially, she came to U.S. at the age of eighteen to study. She spent the first two years in Salinas, California; she went to Hartnell College, a community college there. She then transferred to University of California, Santa Cruz; she got B.S. degree in chemistry at the university because she wanted to train her skills to analyze and approach problems scientifically. She was not keen on working in the biotechnology or related industry, however. She wanted to get a job that enabled her to work with other Americans not because she disliked her mother country or its people but because she felt that it would help her to learn more about U.S. But she ended up started working for a small real estate firm in Brooklyn, New York; Russian immigrants kept coming in large numbers and the firm wanted to hire someone educated in U.S. but spoke fluent Russian and understood Russians. She took the job because she had to make her living somehow; she also felt that moving to the east coat would be a nice change. But she had passion in literature and she eventually started working for a magazine publisher in the city. She had an ambition to write a novel and she did that on weekends and weekday nights, while she learned a lot about writing and publishing at work. First book was published shortly after she turned twenty-six; it was not a huge hit but it sold a modest number of copies. She then became a freelance columnist / novelist and published her second novel a year later. Book sales did not bring her a huge income but, New York Daily News, a sensationalist town paper, paid her handsomely to write columns regularly. Though she spent her formative years in U.S., she still analyzed the country objectively, which made her columns and novels very critical of the country in the eyes of Americans.
Given the nature of writing, many readers imagined that she looked like a feminist writer, but the reality was quite the contrary. She was petite; she was also a cheerful person. There were two stereotypical images of feminists. One was rather chubby and grumpy type; they did not look appealing, nor did they seem to care to make them look appealing. The other was tall, blond and slender, yet inhospitable and icy particular to men. She, however, fit into neither images.
Short Stories (Fiction) | 31.07.2007 10:18 | No Comments
Chapter 4: Male Dominance In Japan
”Male dominance is what stifles the development and progress of human societies, and we can see many more examples worldwide. Japan is another example. Now, it is true that crime rates in the country are very low, even compared to western countries. Per capita income is high and it is a major economy in the world while the size of the population is much smaller than that of U.S., EU, China and India. Very high functional literacy rate, not just literacy rate. It is a very developed country, but it is a male dominant society. For this being the major reason, they have not made any progress whatsoever for some decades fundamentally, that is, philosophically. Let me elaborate on this because this may sound rather alien to you; on the surface, they seem to have everything the modern society can have. Very developed public transportation system, relatively reliable and affordable healthcare system, certainly so much better than one in U.S. and the education system with the notable exception of English language education system. Disposal income is high, so there are many fancy restaurants and bars. If you go visit there, you also probably notice that there are so many bookstores. All these are very positive, but are there any philosophers from there who led us to the next stage of our spiritual and philosophical evolution like Germany’s Kant, France’s Jean Paul Sartre, Netherlands’ Baruch Spinoza and Russia’s Dostoevsky? None, whatsoever. Why is that? Because Japan is a male dominant society, and thus, it is incapable of making progress by itself. What are characteristics of the male dominant society? Repression and suppression! The only thing they manage to do is to copy what the rest of the world invented; in other words, they only know how to steal. The foundation of the society is the hunter society; it does not attempt to nurture, grow, develop or progress. It just takes what is out there. I suppose one can argue that this society is capable of not only hunting and taking animals’ lives but also stealing new technologies and social theories. But, in the end, they never invented anything.
To this day, the social structure in Japan is very unprogressive. Men work and women stay home; women are subservient. True equality may bring more prosperity, but men refuse it; they still want to keep women subservient. Men in this country refuse to or simply don’t recognize the infinite potential, that is, women. And this does not allow them to become the world leader today; they’re refusing to advance to the next stage.”
Short Stories (Fiction) | 31.07.2007 10:18 | No Comments
Chapter 5: Yu, Alex’s Boyfriend
Alex first met Yu when she was in Salinas. They got to know each other briefly; they were interested in each other, but nothing really happened. After a year or so, he left there and she also left shortly after to go to the university. While there was no contact whatsoever between two for some years, they met again in New York two years ago. This time, they became good friends and started seeing each other; they shared similar tastes in books and films. Also while they both assimilated in U.S., they shared the sense of being foreigners and that created a close bond. Yu was Japanese and she got to learn about Japan; she also visited there quite a few times. However, he was very critical of the country and that heavily influenced her thinking. When she made ‘male dominance’ the central theme of her novels and columns, she wrote about the country very critically.
Short Stories (Fiction) | 31.07.2007 10:17 | No Comments
Chapter 6: Male Dominance In India
”Let’s look at India. If you go visit India, one of the first things you notice is the horrific traffic. Some say that it’s a result of the size of the population; roads are too few and too narrow. Others say that it’s a result of lack of education; the current literacy rate is 65% and the functional literacy rate is much lower. Consequently, very basic traffic rules are not followed. But is either of these the root cause? I argue otherwise, but let me explain about automobiles first before I tell you what I think is the root cause of this horrendous traffic in India. Fundamentally, ‘sharing’ is not a function of automobiles. They are designed for you to occupy space, and that space is for you and for you only. Drivers have all the power; others, even including passengers, do not have or share that power. You might be wondering what these characteristics of automobiles have anything to do with the male dominance or the horrific traffic in India, but there are correlations. Men love driving cars because they can occupy space; they can ‘take’ space from others. Automobiles give men power; this is another reason why they love driving. Unlike the public transportation system like the metro train system, automobiles are the antithesis of ‘sharing’; this is why men love driving. In other words, the fundamental design of automobiles is the personification of the male dominance. India is far more male dominant than any westernized countries, and this is why Indian men are so attached to automobiles. Because of this extreme male dominance, Indian drivers are extremely aggressive and disorderly when they drive. They simply dismiss lane driving and keeping distance between two cars because ‘sharing’ is not a male characteristic. As a result, roads in India are packed by the uncontrolled; they cannot conceive of something like the metro train system and this is why there is no decent public transportation system. It’s a stifling society. The standard of living is not improving there; it’s only getting worse. Air pollution, noise pollution and water pollution are getting more and more severe partly due to this horrific traffic condition in India ‘mainly caused by’ the male dominance. You do find women driving automobiles, but most drivers are men so they unfortunately set ‘street rules’; that’s the tragic reality. And consequently, women also drive like maniacs. They are not uncontrollable inherently, but the environment dictates them to follow rules of crazies set up by men.
Another thing you cannot help noticing is the amount of trash; in fact, you might feel that you are walking in the middle of toxic waste when you set your foot in India. Ideas such as collecting, harvesting and organizing are not male ideas. But what is required to keep the place clean? Collecting trash. Do people do that in India, the land of the male dominance? No, they don’t do that. They only attempt to attain whatever they can and throw out the rest. Here’s one of examples; men drink tea and throw out plastic cups in the sewage. Another example. They eat food on paper plates and they throw away plates on the street. They chew tobaccos and spit them out wherever they feel like. Attain and throw away the rest. There is no ‘collection’ of trash. There is no organization to not produce any trash to begin with. All these are typical male behaviors and these behaviors are the norm because the society is extremely male dominant. If you were to give a nickname to the capital of India, New Delhi, you’d probably pick something like ‘City of Filth’ or ‘City of Garbage.’ Streets are covered with trash; this is what the male dominance results in. It is a horror.
I can discuss atrocities on women, lack of access to clean water, lack of constant supply of electricity and other well known problems ‘primarily caused by’ the male dominance in India, but I’d like to discuss how this stifles the development of culture also. What is the characteristic of ‘hunters’? They just take; they’re not interested in cultivating, growing, educating, learning, harnessing or experimenting. They’re happy to get what there is today. If you go visit New Delhi, the capital and spend a couple of months there, you realize that there are no Italian, French, Japanese, German, Russian or Thai restaurants. You wonder why; this is a city of fifteen million people, one of the biggest cities in the world. Here’s a simple explanation; men simply want to take what there is today, that is, Indian food. They’re not interested in experimenting Italian; they’re not interested in learning how to enjoy French wine. This is the tragedy of the male dominance. By the way, quite a few New Delhi locals, especially, men tell you that there are Italian, French, Japanese, German, Russian and Thai restaurants, but that is simply not true, and I’d like to explain why.
There cannot be a single fine French restaurant in New Delhi or any other city while there are no other French restaurants. One French restaurant opens and customers start coming in. But they cannot get ingredients. They cannot hire greatest chefs. They cannot all of a sudden find customers who can appreciate French cuisine in the city where there was no French restaurant before. In most cases, the first restaurant ends up making many modifications to serve uneducated locals. Just to clarify, I mean to say ‘uneducated’ when it comes to French cuisine; I am not talking about college education or MBA. Eventually, customers start getting some idea of what the cuisine is about. Then, there will be five or six restaurants assuming that more and more customers become educated. In time, one or two of restaurants become able to serve French cuisine close to the authentic. There will finally be French chefs coming from France and there will also be Indian chefs trained there. There will also be twenty, forty and even more French restaurants. There will be a community of those who appreciate the authentic French cuisine. And then, only then, there will be one ‘real’ French restaurant in New Delhi, Mumbai or Kolkotta. Now has New Delhi or any other city in India reached this stage? No.”
The audience were slightly taken aback because her speech started sounding rather prejudicial; they were entertained at the same time though. If one wanted to hear or read prejudicial voices, it was not that difficult to do that in U.S., but most of such TV, radio programs and magazines sounded disjointed; they never really got into specifics, nor did they sound analytical. Her speech included very specific examples; she also presented her analyses, though they might be somewhat exaggerated and obstinate.
Short Stories (Fiction) | 31.07.2007 10:17 | No Comments
Chapter 7: Hostility toward India
Yu heavily influenced Alex’s view on India also. His view was almost hostile toward the country; he had been running an IT business for the last several years and he actually spent a few years there in order to grow the business. He also looked into other opportunities, but nothing came to fruition; in the end, his whole venture in India ended up as a total failure. He came back to New York two years ago; about the only thing he learned was ‘Good judgment comes from experience but experience comes from bad judgment’ and the venture was a bad judgment. He kept telling her that Indian food in India tasted so much better than that in New York though. Naturally, because of the result, his attitude was not friendly to the country, its culture, economy, politics or people in India at all. From time to time, he went on hours and hours detailing problems of the country. She actually visited there twice, but because of her preconceived notion, two visits only enforced her to analyze it very negatively.
Short Stories (Fiction) | 31.07.2007 10:16 | No Comments
Chapter 8: Dinner
”There are many corporations in U.S. and subsequently there are many corporate CEOs, right?” asked Yu. Since Alex’s publisher was going to pay all expenses for the book release tour including meals, they decided to stop at a restaurant in Little Italy and spend some money; there were many more expensive restaurants in the city, but he suggested to go there. He spent several months in the city some years ago and also visited there a number of times; it was his familiar territory. He tried several restaurants in Little Italy and liked them all; he asserted that it would be a safe choice to have dinner there. While they waited for their main dishes to arrive, they started talking about Alex’s speech. She answered, “Yes, there are.”
”I’d say that many of them are ruthless. Wouldn’t you agree?”
”Yes, I agree.”
”To an extent, I agree with what you said in your speech, but isn’t a bit of exaggeration to say that the male dominance is the root cause of the reckless behavior of U.S. multi-national corporations? Don’t you think that it has more to do with the structural problem? How the charter is given, how the capital is allocated, how business decisions are made and such?”
”Male dominance is the recurring theme of my novels and columns. I do believe that the male dominance is one of major factors that suppress the advancement of human societies. But I do agree with you that it’s not one and the only one cause.”
”I do agree that Japan hasn’t really produced philosophers of the class of Sartre, Hegel, Aristotle and, you know, giants in philosophy, but isn’t it also a bit of exaggeration to say that they have no idea what they’re doing? Also I don’t live there because of my personal choice not because it’s not a livable place. We had fun when we visited there, didn’t we?” He was not upset or aggravated; he was simply trying to understand her ideology and philosophy and how she developed these ideas.
”Yes, it is an exaggeration, but … I have to say it like that, you know? I have to capture the audience. I have to be a bit … melodramatic.”
”And finally about India. You sounded harsh. It is a developing country, but it’s not a fifth world country, is it? Water supply gets cut off from time to time and electricity goes off often, but it’s a livable place if you ask me. Also … it might not be the best place to live, but it’s a great place to visit. And another thing; you have to understand that things didn’t really work for me, and because of that, I obviously don’t say flattering things about India. After all, I’m human.”
“I didn’t make up problems in India. Besides, it’s so easy to point out problems observed there. Also, I wanted to speak like a … ‘psychoneurotic’ woman to capture the audience, you know?”
”I’m not so sure if you had to do that. The speech was pretty entertaining though. I heard it a few times already, but you sounded a little more enthusiastic today, so that made it sound like a different speech.”
Short Stories (Fiction) | 31.07.2007 10:16 | No Comments
Chapter 9: Political Situation in 2006 And How New York Daily News Ran Its Business
This small event, Alex Vesnik’s book release event in San Francisco, took place in 2006. U.S. still kept its troops in Iraq; in fact, it planned to increase the number in the beginning of the following year. While roughly 50% of the population supported withdrawal of troops, the majority of Americans still had not come around to believe that the preeminent attack was a colossal mistake. Also the preeminent attack on Iran was being suggested and many supported the idea despite the catastrophe in Iraq. The majority did not support the idea not because they did not align with White House ideologically but because they felt that U.S. essentially lacked financial resources to execute the plan. In other words, the hostility toward the Middle East countries was viewed conscientious, if not, it wasn’t viewed unjust. It was rather difficult to determine whether the consensus to be so vitriolic to the Middle East was created by the media or it was already a part of American psyche without being told, but one thing was certain. Half of media outlets essentially supported Iraq War even now and also the preeminent attack on Iran, and their assertion was that Iran could possibly use nuclear weapons to attack first. New York Daily News was one of such media outlets; it sold a lot of gossip stories but it also sold conspicuous political stories. Those stories were often fanatically patriotic but writers were expected to follow that viewpoint. There was the myth that its management passed a memo telling writers to project such viewpoint, but the myth was never confirmed. But a certain management decision was made that caused many to believe that myth. If a writer who contributed to New York Daily News wrote anything unnationalistic, for example, a column to criticize Iraq War, his/her contract was not going to be renewed.
Short Stories (Fiction) | 31.07.2007 10:15 | No Comments