Original paragraph: Whether we look at
collective intelligence as the outcome of behaviors or as the product of
multiple individuals coming together with their ideas, the end product still looks
like a single entity, not an amalgamate of distinct ideas. Whether it’s
Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita, which
liberally borrows from its predecessor in terms of plot, the ‘podcasts’
introduced by the students of Duke or the incredible organization of the ant
colonies, the final received information comes in the form of a single voice,
not many.
It was suggested that I strengthen this paragraph by making it more relevant and relatable in a general situation.
Revised paragraph: Whether we look at collective intelligence as the outcome of behaviors or as the product of multiple individuals coming together with their ideas, the end product still looks like a single entity, not an amalgamate of distinct ideas. Hardly anyone reading Vladimir Nabokov's iconic Lolita would note that the story liberally borrows from its predecessor in terms of plot, and very few people seem to remember that Rapunzel and Snow White were their own stories before they became Disney trademarks. This pattern of many voices leading to one leaves us to wonder how often this has happened and gone unnoticed. Is Harry Potter really the product of one completely uninfluenced mind? Did the creators of Star Trek shut themselves off from the outside world in order to create a story completely free of traces of other works? The answer, inevitably, is no. All the universes we know and love have their influences and their inspirations, and those inspirations have their own inspirations, and so on and so on. The final product displays no obvious hints of containing the ideas of many. However, this knowledge doesn't detract from our enjoyment of the final product, which takes these ideas and incorporates them into something new and fun, giving new life to the original thoughts. They may not be heard, but the value of the contributing voices is not lost. Just as the various authors unwittingly contributed to and supported Lethem's argument in his essay, the contributions of individuals in a project or concept are important and integral to the idea as a whole.
A well written account, but I'm intrigued by the obvious differences between the examples you cite, and would prefer that you not collapse them. It's not nearly as obvious how Lolita resembles another novel as it is that Snow White and Rapunzel are based on folk tales. Instead of claiming that the sources are invisible in both cases, wouldn't it be more interested in thinking about why we are willing (or obligated) to overlook influences in some cases but not others?
ReplyDelete