Ramanujan Redux

Read this post by Razib this weekend, and it got me thinking, which is always a bad sign. It usually means something stupid’s about to come out of my mouth, so bear with me.

One thing that Razib points out is the fundamental difference between gender and genre. Males enjoy plot-driven stories, escapist fiction. We don’t want to focus on characters and their development, we want storyline and plot. Get to the point, get to the next point, etc. Women enjoy more of the character development stuff, the writing prose, etc. etc.

So I was wondering–is our interest in certain books wired into our own primitive desires? Do we like certain books because they fire up a part of our own evolutionary structure?

Think about it. Men enjoy plot-based books, with an aura of mystery but also of adventure and exploration. Books have the power to take us away. It takes us away from the burden of work and responsibility, provides us refuge from the toil we endure. We have traditionally been the ones to carry the load for our families, and while the gender gap has made dramatic shifts in the past 200 years, our brains don’t evolve nearly as fast.

Just like the supposed theory that our bodies have supposedly not caught up to agricultural products toxifying our body, our brains have not yet fully caught up to the idea that women can now bear equal responsibility, so it takes our own growth and development in life to adjust to this. Because of the growing amount of entertainment options in the Internet age and the relegation of books to a niche activity among the XYs, many of us never do.

Women, on the other hand, have traditionally been groomed to find mates. Unlike male, whose work, intelligence, wealth, and physical stature defined him, a female was traditionally defined by the strength of her partner. So it became important for her to find that character, and that required deep examination of human psychology to attract suitable mates. So isn’t it natural that females would enjoy books that involved deep character study and soothing words of comfort and seduction?

(Another possibility is that if females were not happy with the mates they got, they could dream up their ideal Cassanova to escape the doom and gloom of their situation. Hence the continuing popularity of harlequin novels for women in completely unsatisfying marriages.)

I’m not sure how far I’ve gotten, but the last work of fiction I read was Kafka on the Shore, and it touched me so profoundly because of how mystical and otherworldly it was. I felt like I was being transferred away from this world and into a dream. It was…liberating. I certainly felt like I was in another world, and didn’t have to worry about the one I was in now.

Sound familiar?

There’s my crock theory. Someone please tear it apart.

Sun Tzu’s The Art of War illustrates many an interesting point, but there was one thing that comes to mind—the easy path never looks like the right one. When attacking, the easy thing to do is attack head-on—it’s also the easiest way to get lit up like a Christmas tree. When defending, the easiest thing is to hunker down, don’t move—but eventually you’ll be overrun, overwhelmed, and someone else will take the place in the bunker. What is it about taking the hard path that makes it the right way to survive the longest? And why do many of us decide to choose the easy path even if we know what would make us happy?

“Do not repeat the tactics which have gained you one victory, but let your methods be regulated by the infinite variety of circumstances.” Again, the easy thing is to repeat is what is successful right? But what is successful today will not necessarily be successful tomorrow. One must retool, reorient himself to his surroundings, and adapt to the situation in the proper way. This is hard. But it’s necessary.

“According as circumstances are favorable, one should modify one’s plans. “ Again, not easy to change in the moment, especially if one is set in their ways. We can think of this in business with the Entrenched Player’s Dilemma. How does one leave what they know works for them right now? Isn’t it difficult to sever ties with someone you know very well, even if this person adds nothing to your life? Nevertheless, the right choice remains there for us to accept–that our time and effort is too valuable to be spent on petty squabbles. Think of the big picture. There will be more people to meet and connect with. The time you lose in the meaningless battles you fight you will never get back.

Fight smart. Don’t just fight hard.

What are your own thoughts and elucidations on these quotes?

Generally, when I search for book quotes, I get deeply interested. Haruki Murakami’s The Wind-Up Bird is one such tale that hits me deep.

“His parents egged him on, providing him with the best tutors their money could buy. When he took top honors, they rewarded their son by buying him anything he wanted.  His childhood was one of extreme material luxury, but when he entered the most sensitive and vulnerable phase of life, he had no time for girlfriends, no chance to go wild with other boys. He had to pour all his energies into maintaining his position as number one.”

Considering the fate of this character, I think I need to stop being like that. At least all the time.