American wit and humor; Evolution (Biology) -- Wit and humor
So Potter and I, developing this train of thought, began to imagine we
had lived many ages ago, and somehow or other had alighted here from
some older planet. Familiar with the ways of evolution elsewhere in the
universe, we naturally should have wondered what course it would take
on this earth. "Even in this out-of-the-way corner of the Cosmos," we
might have reflected, "and on this tiny star, it may be of interest to
consider the trend of events." We should have tried to appraise the
different species as they wandered around, each with its own set of
good and bad characteristics. Which group, we'd have wondered, would
ever contrive to rule all the rest?
And how great a development could they attain to thereafter?
_FOUR_
If we had landed here after the great saurians had been swept from the
scene, we might first have considered the lemurs or apes. They had
hands. Aesthetically viewed, the poor simians were simply grotesque;
but travelers who knew other planets might have known what beauty may
spring from an uncouth beginning in this magic universe.
Still--those frowzy, unlovely hordes of apes and monkeys were so
completely lacking in signs of kingship; they were so flighty, too, in
their ways, and had so little purpose, and so much love for absurd and
idle chatter, that they would have struck us, we thought, as unlikely
material. Such traits, we should have reminded ourselves, persist. They
are not easily left behind, even after long stages; and they form a
terrible obstacle to all high advancement.
_FIVE_
The bees or the ants might have seemed to us more promising. Their
smallness of size was not necessarily too much of a handicap. They
could have made poison their weapon for the subjugation of rivals. And
in these orderly insects there was obviously a capacity for labor, and
co-operative labor at that, which could carry them far. We all know
that they have a marked genius: great gifts of their own. In a
civilization of super-ants or bees, there would have been no problem of
the hungry unemployed, no poverty, no unstable government, no riots, no
strikes for short hours, no derision of eugenics, no thieves, perhaps
no crime at all.
Ants are good citizens: they place group interests first.
But they carry it so far, they have few or no political rights. An ant
doesn't have the vote, apparently: he just has his duties.
This quality may have something to do with their having group wars. The
egotism of their individual spirits is allowed scant expression, so the
egotism of the group is extremely ferocious and active. Is this one of
the reasons why ants fight so much? They go in for State Socialism,
yes, but they are not internationalists. And ants commit atrocities in
and after their battles that are--I wish I could truly say--inhuman.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account