A Million Monkeys

Andrew Keen is a bit of a curmudgeon. It’s hard to know how much of his own words he actually believes and how much of it he writes simply because it has become his niche, what people expect of him. But he’s still a lot of fun to read. Here’s a brief excerpt from his book The Cult of the Amateur. While it’s a little bit one-sided in its attack on bloggers and musicians and YouTubers and everyone else who creates content on the web today, I think we can all identify to some extent, with his frustrations. It begins with a conversation he had with a San Francisco software producer who was describing his new product.

It’s MySpace meets YouTube meets Wikipedia meets Google,” he said. “On steroids.”

In reply, I explained I was working on a polemic about the destructive impact of the digital revolution on our culture, economy, and values.

It’s ignorance meets egoism meets bad taste meets mob rule,” I said, unable to resist a smile. “On steroids.”

He smiled uneasily in return. “So it’s Huxley meets the digital age,” he said. “You’re rewriting Huxley for the twenty first century.” He raised his wine glass in my honor. “To Brave New World 2.0!”

We clinked wine glasses. But I knew we were toasting the wrong Huxley. Rather than Aldous, the inspiration behind this book comes from his grandfather, T.H. Huxley, the nineteenth-century evolutionary biologist and author of the “infinite monkey theorem.” Huxley’s theory says that if you provide infinite monkeys with infinite typewriters, some monkey somewhere will eventually create a masterpiece—a play by Shakespeare [An editorial addition I can’t resist—“It was the best of times, it was the blurst of times!? You stupid money!”], a Platonic dialogue, or an economics treatise by Adam Smith.

In the pre-Internet age, T.H. Huxley’s scenario of infinite monkeys empowered with infinite technology seemed more like a mathematical jest than a dystopian vision. But what had once appeared as a joke now seems to foretell the consequences of a flattening of culture that is blurring the lines between traditional audience and author, creator and consumer, expert and amateur. This is no laughing matter.

Today’s technology hooks all those monkeys up to all those typewriters. Except in our Web 2.0 world, the typewriters aren’t quite typewriters, but rather networked personal computers, and the monkeys aren’t quite monkeys, but rather Internet users. And instead of creating masterpieces, these millions and millions of exuberant monkeys—many with no more talent in the creative arts than our primate cousins—are creating an endless digital forest of mediocrity. For today’s amateur monkeys can use their networked computers to publish everything from uninformed political commentary, to unseemly home videos, to embarrassingly amateurish music, to unreadable poems, reviews, essays and novels.

Comments (10)

1
Anonymous's picture

friendly FYI: you flubbed the “editorial addition” - should be “you stupid monkey!” not “you stupid money!”

2
Anonymous's picture

The funny thing about the Shakespeare editorial comment is that Dickens wrote “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times”, not Shakespeare!

3
Anonymous's picture

While I agree Keen’s comment about egoism on steroids, I don’t find anything wrong with, for example, someone who is a mediocre singer putting up a video on YouTube just for the fun of it.

These things (for me, blogging) can easily become an especially prideful endeavor though.

4
Anonymous's picture

Hey, you have to give us monkeys enough time to come up with our masterpiece. We’ve only been at this for a little over ten years now.

5
Anonymous's picture

The monkey analogy depends on two words: “infinite,” and “a.” That is, an INFINITE number of monkeys will eventually create A masterpiece.

1) As Randy (#4) noted, internet users have not yet reached (and will not reach) an infinite number. We can’t possibly be held to the same expectations of an infinity of typists - monkey or otherwise.

2) And if we’re waiting on ONE masterpiece, I’d argue we’ve probably achieved that already. It doesn’t say that EVERY monkey will create a masterpiece, but that collectively one masterpiece will be attained by an infinity of monkey typists. I imagine if you scour the blogosphere for a masterpiece, you’re bound to find at least one (Perhaps an entry at www.HyperboleAndAHalf.com?).

So I don’t think the analogy holds. But of course - it’s just an analogy. And I get his point, which is sort of cute. I’ll probably never create a masterpiece myself, but I’m perfectly happy being a monkey with a keyboard.

6
Anonymous's picture

Nobody HAS to read what a monkey types. :) The problems begin when someone chooses to believe what a monkey says just because he can type. But then whose fault is that?

7
Anonymous's picture

Atheist Douglas Adams referred to the “infinite monkeys”hypothesis in “The Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy”, but I never got the reference until now. Thanks, Tim, for posting this. Sorry for the Seinfeldian nature of my comment; maybe I’ll comment on the larger meaning later.

8
Anonymous's picture

It’s the flying blue monkeys from Oz that give me the willies. They may be a masterpiece but they’re very, very scary.

9
Anonymous's picture

make me think of: http://amzn.to/9GHEIq

Millions of fingers! Millions of thumbs! Million of monkeys drumming on drums!!! Dum, Ditty Dum, Ditty, Dum, Dum, DUM!!”

10
Anonymous's picture

Ahh, I had an old boss that had a twist on this. “A million monkeys, typing for a million years, will eventually produce the entire volume of Shakespeare’s works,” what his quote.

Looks like people grasp tightly onto their fables and often expand upon them in their own hearts and minds.

(by the way, regarding the CAPTCHA question - you made me lie becuase I love spam - it’s wonderful with mayo, onion and chopped pickels, very low carb)