Reply to comment

The fundamental difference I see between biological evolution and the evolution of stories is that with biological evolution, we can legitimately get things less wrong and perfect our story, but with the evolution of stories, (which are still up to more interpretations than one), we are not necessarily getting it less wrong, rather than adapting stories or changing them.  In literature, I feel like there is never a right answer, and it annoys me.  I said this in the beginning of the course and I still feel this way.....that with science, I feel more secure because I actually feel like there is more evidence that backs it up and I feel like I am getting things less wrong.  With literature, I feel like it can be interpreted in billions of different ways and never know what the author intended to mean (or if the author themselves knew what they were actually getting at).  So, essentially, I believe the processes of evolution is applied a bit differently under the two circumstances!