The adage goes that if given an endless amount of time, an endless amount of monkeys and probably just as many typewriters, the troop will eventually produce the complete works of Shakespeare, sans error. Sometimes it’s just Hamlet. Others, one of the shorter sonnets. That’s an expression which, along with its essay of origin “Mécanique Statistique et Irréversibilité”, turns 100 this year. Or next year; sources differ… if you gave an infinite amount of internet archivers an infinite amount of time to choose a primary source, one questions whether they’d do as well as the monkeys.
In the brains of French mathematicians born before the airplane it all adds up, but something about that knot theory (more popular sister string theory) gives pause. Knots without any endpoints. Of course, it makes sense that you’d reach such an outcome allowing for an infinite amount of time, just about when this article is expected to wrap up. But maybe the knot is tied, and the monkeys can’t untie it by chance. The works of Shakespeare already exist, and somebody worked pretty hard on them. All the same, is the great South African novel out there (or more pressingly, the great South African screenplay), waiting to be typed by free-associative chance? A.I. art does not give much hope; if there were ever a technological advancement capable of proving excellence through reiterative happenstance, this would be it. The day that happens, we may join Werner Herzog in eating his shoes. As Robert Wilensky once put it: Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true. Though something along the lines of Titus Andronicus may be in the cards.
They did once give a typewriter to a bunch of Sulawesi Crested Macaques. What they produced was published as NOTES TOWARDS THE COMPLETE WORKS OF S H A K E S P E A R E
by ELMO, GUM, HEATHER, HOLLY, MISTLETOE & ROWAN. It starts as follows:
“ff
vvvvvvvpppsssggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg
ggggggggggggggggggsssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss”
…and ends with:
“ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssnaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
aaaaaaasssssssssssssssssfssssfhgggggggsssassfssssssgggggggaaavmlvvssajjjlssssssssssssssssajjjajaajjsssssaaaaaaaaaaaaavvjjjjlajjjjjaaaaaajjjjjjjajjjjjjjdjjajjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjaajjjjjjjjjjjjjjaaaaaaaaaajjjjjjjajajjjjjjjaajjjjjjjjjjjjjbjmmslllggmmlljjmmmmmmnjjjnvvvnbvvmmllnknnbmmmmllllllllllllllllllllllllllllblbbbbnnfllmnnmjfgmnmmmassssssjjkbhnmnn”
The only English word we’ve found in the text is “ass”. Four times. There’s little difference between this and the work of A.I. It’s getting better every day? No, it’s getting more polished. There is as much artistic validity to the contributions of Elmo, Gum, Heather, Holly, Mistletoe and Rowan, as in the learned Dall-E. So don’t feel too bad about what you’ve made. Most of us know as much about French mathematicians, theoretical physics and Artificial Intelligence as the monkeys do, enough to make an article out of them (A.I. enthusiasts, we implore you: leave the joke be). An illogical, personal and mildly creative article. And if all else fails, it’s time to start building alibis, and running errands to your local zoo.