A great crime against pedantry is in progress and it's time for someone to draw a line.
There are monkeys, and then there are apes. They are two different things, like dogs and bears, or pants and socks, or homeopathy and functioning medicine. Monkeys, apes. Apes, monkeys. If you're not getting this, here's a handy visual guide to cut out of your monitor and keep:
There are many obvious differences between monkeys and apes. Apes are bigger, lack tails, have larger brains and more human-like shoulder joints. Monkeys leap around in trees and crap on your head from a great height. If an ape is crapping on your head, the chances are your head is planted in the ground with 450lbs of ape on top of it.
While both are primates, apes and monkeys are in different families. Simians are divided into New World monkeys and Old World simians, with Old World creatures further divided into Old World monkeys and apes. Humans are members of the ape family, distinguished by weediness, lack of hair, technological development and widespread ironic denial of their ape heritage.
These differences are important. Other writers are preoccupied with trivia like the NHS reforms or education funding, but a great crime against pedantry is in progress and it's time for someone to draw a line. Like many of today's problems, this one is epitomized by a Daily Mail headline:
'Fans go bananas for new Planet Of The Apes trailer which takes humanised monkey effects to a whole new level.'
Really? Really? Only actually, as 'humanised monkeys' go they look a bit rubbish to me, because they don't really look like monkeys at all, they look more like apes, what with the film being 'Planet of the Apes' and all.
Of course the original film is problematic as well, as you can see from the fatally-flawed premise:
'An astronaut crew crash lands on a planet in the distant future where intelligent talking apes are the dominant species.'
The irony here is that intelligent talking apes already are the dominant species on Earth. John F. Kennedy was an intelligent talking ape. Gandhi was an intelligent talking ape. Jesus and the Prophet Mohammed were intelligent talking apes. David Cameron is an... a talking ape.
Somehow though, whether through overt denial or just poor education, we've wandered into a perverse reality where people think that they aren't apes but that apes are monkeys. In terms of biological heritage this confusion is like believing your Mum is actually your distant cousin - feel free to make up your own joke about inbreeding and creationists here.
Apparently these subtle nuances are beyond a lot of entertainment journalists covering 'Rise of the Planet of the Apes':
No, he knocked about with apes.
'Trailer for Rise of the Planet of the Apes Promises Monkey Invasion'
No it doesn't. The monkeys aren't invading. The monkeys aren't really a big part of the film, certainly not in a speaking role.
No, he talks apes, because he is making a film about apes.
APE business.
''Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes' Concept Art: The Monkeys Shall Inherit The Earth'
The monkeys shall do bugger all. The most significant change to occur in the lives of monkeys after the events of this film will be a direct result of the discovery that poo flung at furrier overlords is more likely to stick.
I know that entertainment journalists aren't all morons. Some of them are able to achieve remarkable feats of intellect and empathy, like sitting through The Last Airbender all the way to the end without having a brain aneurysm, or making up all those combo-names for celebrity couples like 'Angelad', or remembering the names of all 42 Kardashian sisters and then actually giving a crap about what they do. So come on - apes, not bloody monkeys, apes. Is it really so hard?
No comments:
Post a Comment