How to Mend Corporate America

I am not surprised by the fact that corporate America is a theme that continuously emerges in the  the novels in a 21^st Century American Fiction class. Corporatism is a major component of the modern US, and everyone seems to have an opinion about the ethics of such an extremely business/consumer-driven society. Most are critical, including the authors we have read, but one of the complaints that we have had is of authors who do not provide an ideal solution for the myriad flaws they find in such a society (Jonathan Franzen, for example). Providing a solution is something that I believe Allegra Goodman certainly does, and does very well.

Goodman distinctly situates herself in the field of those who are anti-corporate America as it exists today. She does this through her character Jonathan. Jonathan is led by his vicious, competitive drive throughout the novel, and ends up dead by the end. Goodman consistently uses a disapproving tone when discussing Jonathan’s business actions in the novel. He is referred to by other characters as “‘just another greedy, techno-freak gazillionaire’” who is clearly more interested in profit than people, as evidenced by his stealing of Veritech’s ideas despite risking his fiancée’s trust (205&351). Jonathan’s character represents the greedy, unethical, demented side of business that has become so common in the US recently. Through him, Goodman criticizes corporate America along with the rest of the authors we have read, such as Franzen. However, she does not dismiss corporatism entirely, but rather suggests a reform. She does this through Emily.

Emily’s character represents sensible, ethical, non-profit-crazed business. She is Goodman’s solution to the society created by the Jonathans of the world. Emily and Jonathan’s business tactics and views are often juxtaposed in the novel. For example, after Jonathan labels Emily’s coworker Alex a “shark,” Goodman writes “She was surprised because she was Emily, and she did not share Jonathan’s frank assessment of coworkers as losers, whiners, bozos, sharks” (215). Emily assumes rationality and ethics in everyone she works with, whereas Jonathan assumes the worst and acts equivalently. Emily also refuses to move forward with an unethical business proposition that involves stripping people of privacy in order to achieve security. She says “it’s not where we want to go,” and dismisses the opportunity, whereas Jonathan immediately snatches up the idea and develops it for his own company, sans regard to morals (212&251). Emily's company even has a respectable mission: to provide "math education" (203). Goodman’s stark comparison between the moral behavior of Emily with the corrupt behavior of Jonathan draws out a representation of Emily as the ideal businesswoman.

I think Goodman is arguing that corporatism does not need to disappear, but rather should morph into a less-competitive, more ethical version. If Emily’s path were followed, then leaders of corporate America would be working together sensibly rather than attempting to destroy each other at every turn. Goodman provides Emily as a role model for the modern businessperson by highlighting her rationality and contrasting it with Jonathan’s insane aggression.