4.6 Lamarck’s Revenge
61
the other in full or in part, with mutual relations as complex and obscure. All goods
are passed to a consumer through a complicated network of distributors, agents, and
promoters. Even if you see a movie, credits start with a long list of producers and
sponsors, and, of course, most scientific papers end with acknowledgments to this
fund or that. All this was and still is developing according to Lamarck’s laws; just
reinterpret the definition of an “organ” in the above quotation, and not always for
the benefit of society at large, rather than owners or beneficiaries of an “organ”.
On the other hand, if we look back at medieval societies, we observe that they
were strictly structured in another way. Everybody was assigned to their niche, peasants to their lots, artisans to their guilds, and nobility to the ladder of vassals and
suzerains. Even angels had a hierarchy of their own, from the lowest-rank privates of
the heavenly army to the seraphim. Everybody’s social position could be established
by their dress and manner of speaking, eating, and entertaining. All this has gone.
In a democracy, people are equal, and rich and poor wear jeans and sneakers in the
street, even if bought at a different price. In the developed world, everybody travels,
though some in business class and others in economy. There are, of course, elites,
but they are not closed, and sportsmen and entertainers are on a par with royalty and
financial moguls.
We can extend this picture to culture. It has known periods of sophistication and
digression, and it looks like we are now in the latter phase. Compare the elaborate
rhyming structure of Dante’s tercets or of the classical sonnet to vers libre, further
descending into plain strings of inexpressive words. Compare Risorgimento paintings to the contents of empty museum rooms with straight lines and squares on
the walls, Baroque music to pop songs or the monotony of Philip Glass. In complete contrast, the dynamic language of modern dance exceeds in its complexity
and versatility both classical ballet and folk dance. Can an organ weakened by constant disuse ever be restored? Perhaps. There are still people investing great efforts
in learning to play old instruments for very little remuneration, and there are still
people eager to listen to them. There are groups of painters aspiring to restore old
techniques – but both money and society’s attention are directed elsewhere.
We see both simplifying and elaborating tendencies at work – but the latter are
closely connected to the production of goods, and this has developed into an extremely complex interconnected super-metabolic network. Politics, civil mores, and
art are “parasites” feeding on this network, and they can afford simplification with
no dire consequences, at least for a while. Yet they bear memes that are passed to
later generations, who, being nurtured on degraded culture, may become unable to
sustain the metabolic complexity essential for their survival.
61
the other in full or in part, with mutual relations as complex and obscure. All goods
are passed to a consumer through a complicated network of distributors, agents, and
promoters. Even if you see a movie, credits start with a long list of producers and
sponsors, and, of course, most scientific papers end with acknowledgments to this
fund or that. All this was and still is developing according to Lamarck’s laws; just
reinterpret the definition of an “organ” in the above quotation, and not always for
the benefit of society at large, rather than owners or beneficiaries of an “organ”.
On the other hand, if we look back at medieval societies, we observe that they
were strictly structured in another way. Everybody was assigned to their niche, peasants to their lots, artisans to their guilds, and nobility to the ladder of vassals and
suzerains. Even angels had a hierarchy of their own, from the lowest-rank privates of
the heavenly army to the seraphim. Everybody’s social position could be established
by their dress and manner of speaking, eating, and entertaining. All this has gone.
In a democracy, people are equal, and rich and poor wear jeans and sneakers in the
street, even if bought at a different price. In the developed world, everybody travels,
though some in business class and others in economy. There are, of course, elites,
but they are not closed, and sportsmen and entertainers are on a par with royalty and
financial moguls.
We can extend this picture to culture. It has known periods of sophistication and
digression, and it looks like we are now in the latter phase. Compare the elaborate
rhyming structure of Dante’s tercets or of the classical sonnet to vers libre, further
descending into plain strings of inexpressive words. Compare Risorgimento paintings to the contents of empty museum rooms with straight lines and squares on
the walls, Baroque music to pop songs or the monotony of Philip Glass. In complete contrast, the dynamic language of modern dance exceeds in its complexity
and versatility both classical ballet and folk dance. Can an organ weakened by constant disuse ever be restored? Perhaps. There are still people investing great efforts
in learning to play old instruments for very little remuneration, and there are still
people eager to listen to them. There are groups of painters aspiring to restore old
techniques – but both money and society’s attention are directed elsewhere.
We see both simplifying and elaborating tendencies at work – but the latter are
closely connected to the production of goods, and this has developed into an extremely complex interconnected super-metabolic network. Politics, civil mores, and
art are “parasites” feeding on this network, and they can afford simplification with
no dire consequences, at least for a while. Yet they bear memes that are passed to
later generations, who, being nurtured on degraded culture, may become unable to
sustain the metabolic complexity essential for their survival.