American wit and humor; Evolution (Biology) -- Wit and humor
Dogs? They have more spirit. But they have lost their chance
of kingship through worshipping us. The dog's finer qualities
can't be praised too warmly; there is a purity about his devotion
which makes mere men feel speechless: but with all love for
dogs, one must grant they are vassals, not rulers. They are too
parasitic--the one willing servant class of the world. And we have
betrayed them by making under-simians of them. We have taught them
some of our own ways of behaving, and frowned upon theirs. Loving
us, they let us stop their developing in tune with their natures;
and they've patiently tried ever since to adopt ways of ours. They
have done it, too; but of course they can't get far: it's not their
own road. Dogs have more love than integrity. They've been true
to us, yes, but they haven't been true to themselves.
Pigs? The pig is remarkably intelligent and brave,--but he's
gross; and grossness delays one's achievement, it takes so much
time. The snake too, though wise, has a way of eating himself into
stupors. If super-snake-men had had banquets they would have been
too vast to describe. Each little snake family could have eaten a
herd of cattle at Christmas.
Goats, then? Bears or turtles? Wolves, whales, crows? Each had
brains and pride, and would have been glad to rule the world if
they could; but each had their defects, and their weaknesses for
such a position.
The elephant? Ah! Evolution has had its tragedies, hasn't it, as
well as its triumphs; and well should the elephant know it. He had
the best chance of all. Wiser even than the lion, or the wisest of
apes, his wisdom furthermore was benign where theirs was sinister.
Consider his dignity, his poise and skill. He was plastic, too. He
had learned to eat many foods and endure many climates. Once, some
say, this race explored the globe. Their bones are found everywhere,
in South America even; so the elephants' Columbus may have found some
road here before ours. They are cosmopolitans, these suave and
well-bred beings. They have rich emotional natures, long memories,
loyalty; they are steady and sure; and not narrow, not self-absorbed,
for they seem interested in everything. What was it then, that put
them out of the race?
Could it have been a quite natural belief that they had already won?
And when they saw that they hadn't, and that the monkey-men were
getting ahead, were they too great-minded and decent to exterminate
their puny rivals?
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