In the narrative “Shakespeare In The Bush”, Laura Bohannan explores the topic on whether or not the opinions humans hold are universal in nature. In the short stories, “Cranes”, written by Hwang Sun-Won and translated by Peter H. Lee and “Saboteur”, by Ha Jin, the authors tackle Bohannan’s concept, instead focusing on whether or not this notion exists within an authoritarian government. “Cranes”, takes place after World War II, during the Korean War, when there was a divide between North Korea and South Korea. There is a conflict between the political systems of communism and democracy that must decide to fall within. Allegiance to the North or South results in you following the dictates of that state, as well as being considered an enemy to the opposing side. On the other hand, “Saboteur” takes place in China, directly after the Cultural Revolution enforced by Chairman Mao. Who had advocated for communism and the abolition of capitalist beliefs, which in terms led to the corruption of the nation and an unjust society due to the rules and regulations enforced on the Republic Of China. The proposition that “Shakespeare In The Bush”, had made that the human nature being ubiquitous throughout the world is unfactual, as the literary works of “Cranes” and “Saboteur” both demonstrate the conflicting views towards a system of government. In the text “Cranes, ” written by Hwang Sun-Won and translated by Peter H. Lee, the text disapproves the notion that the opinions hold are universal in nature, through defiance by Song-Sam of the authoritarian government.

Pledging allegiance to North and South Korea would mean being seen as an enemy by the opposing side. Following this, you would have to follow the dictates and the jurisdiction of the government. That begs the question, are ideas of individualism, moral obligation, and personal responsibility transformed under this rule? Hwang Sun-Won answered this question with, “Tok-chae turned toward him once again and glared. The glare grew intense and his mouth twitched. ‘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”. To translate this scene, both Tok-Chae and Song-Sam are developing emotional tension with one another that hadn’t existed before. The Korean War had split two groups of people apart and the words that Song-Sam speaks are not his own, rather they are the words of the South Korean government. Why else would someone treat their childhood friend in such manner only after the government came into the picture? The people of Korea made a decision to stay North or to stay South, but that decision leads to following a new sect of government and the government itself is what fueled the words of Song-Sam and how his personal thinking did not play a part in the words he is speaking. This scene is distinguished as part of the rising actions of the story and the metaphor being described here compares Song-Sam past self to his current transformed state, how one can appear to be altered by an individual or group individuals, but that can be far from the truth. An example of behaviorism, or altering the mindset and beliefs of a group of people through the state of conditioning, or in the historical context of this story propaganda and government regulations.

Author Hwang Sun-Won characterizes the change of mindset and beliefs one might experience with “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”. Through an indefinite choice of words, Hwang Sun-won utilizes this moment to convey the realization that Song-Sam makes regarding his stance in the Korean War. The numerous views towards this authoritarian government system indicates a more complex view of the world. There an infinite number of views which results in the foundation of new political systems, which may or may not condense the ideas of a group of individuals to one term. The resolution of the story is one many expect, Tok-chae is set free and has no fear of being executed. However, Tok-Chae has become something thanks to Song-Sam, a crane. Tok-chae is the equivalent of cranes, which serves as a contrast to his previous characterization as a fugitive. A prisoner who serves no chance of escape transforming to the free and boundless individual. The political schism present in “Cranes”, plays unique dynamic of the setting influence of individualism under an authoritarian government and play the role of one result of the examination, with different settings that could be introduced and result in varying experiences for individuals and society.

Ha Jin characterizes the transgression of the Chinese government laws and regulations through the intellectual, Mr. Chiu, who serves as evidence to why Laura Bohannan notation to why Laura Bohannan’s claim about universality in humans is unfactual. In context, the current setting that Mr. Chiu is in the politically corrupt China, under the rule of Chairman Mao. Imagine everyday life being forced to say certain things or do certain things? This is what life in China would be under Mao. Ha Jin the Chinese American writer explores the corrupt nature of the Chinese government with, “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’ ”. This quote is attempting to convey that Mao and his officials were unabashedly corrupt individuals who serve the purpose of upholding the so-called social order Mao had created themselves. The rising actions of this story interestingly uses a metaphor to show a clear distinction from the expository section of the narrative. In the exposition, we learn that Mr. Chiu and his wife are waiting near the train station to leave their honeymoon from Muji. Mr. Chiu’s sandals that are ruined by police officials symbolize his character emotional state from a positive to being abruptly disrupted into a distressed and emotional mindset. Mr. Chiu 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. If necessary, we will argue about this in the Northeastern Daily, or we will go to the highest People’s Court in Beijing”. This quote gives insight on the true extent of Mr. Chiu’s emotional state, which has drastically deteriorated. 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. This high degree of respect is nowhere to be seen in this conversation. This scene is developing the conflict that Mr. Chiu is experiencing during this conflict and building up a feeling of hopelessness, as Mr. Chiu wonders whether or not there is an option to escape. This feeling of hopelessness is connecting the juxtaposition of Mr. Chiu and the police officials. One could make comparisons of the supposed intelligence level, their reasoning, and their mindset. When juxtaposing these roles it furthers the personal conflict for Mr. Chiu and as if the words he is speaking don’t have any effect, which to this point is proven to be true. Ha Jin furthers the evaluation of how an authoritarian government affects one and in this case, emotionally and mentally.

The authors Ha Jin and Hwang Sun-Won differ in the governmental authority present in the story, which affects both the political message and theme. From early to modern history, there has been several different variations on an authoritarian government, . Authoritarian 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 highlight the difference in the governmental systems of their respectful narratives through the use of their protagonists and antagonists. Hwang Sun-Won demonstrates this difference through Song-Sam when 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”. On the other hand, Ha Jin uses Mr. Chiu contrast this when he states, “ ‘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 handwritings, 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”. These quotes both lead to entirely separate viewpoints and ideas. 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. However, both Song-Sam and Tok-Chae are under the influence of an authorial figure respectively. Describing a metaphor of obligation when being forced to make decisions. While Mr. Chiu is clearly under the influence a corrupt government that controls its citizens with rules and regulations.

So the theme of moral obligation is not present in this story, rather it is about the meaning of courage and the consequences of this. Censorship is heavily debated in the United States of America due to violating the first amendment of the U. S Constitution, the freedom of speech. What can we really say in our society without being considered disturbing the peace or disorderly conduct?