‘The Library of Babel’ is part of
Jorge Luis Borges’ collection of short stories, Ficciones, which was
published in 1944. It is about a vast, nearly infinite library which constantly
expands and which contains every possible permutation of language and lived
experience. Borges was a tremendously erudite author and he was extremely
well-read. Books and libraries were a central part of his life since an early
age: ‘Borges's father, had a large
library of English and Spanish books, and his son, whose frail constitution
made it impossible to participate in more strenuous activities, spent many
hours reading. "If I were asked to name the chief event in my life, I
should say my father's library," Borges stated’ (Poetry Foundation 2019).
Although Borges was Argentinean, his writing has been called cosmopolitan, as
he synthesised ideas from several literary cultures. His writing was
self-referential, intertextual and has been called ‘metafiction.’ ‘The Library
of Babel’ is one of Borges’ most famous stories and encapsulates all of these
elements. In the contemporary world, the vastest source of knowledge could
possibly be the internet. The purpose of this essay is to compare Borges’
library with aspects of the internet.
This essay will begin
by defining the technical and conceptual principles of the internet. The
internet can be broadly defined as a network that connects people all over the
world (Porter 2018). It works according to a set of agreed protocols, which are
the Control Protocol (TCP) and the Internet Protocol (IP). The internet is
partly enabled by a ‘packet switching system,’ where a message is broken into a
packet that is transmitted independently across the internet. These packets are
called ‘Datagrams,’ although the messages are sometimes transmitted across
different routes. The information is comprised of the number of protocols in
use, the IP address of the sender and the IP address of the recipient (Porter
2018). Conceptually, the internet had very clear principles. The internet was
founded by Tim Berners-Lee, who had egalitarian principles in mind. He wanted
the internet to be decentralised, where ‘no central authority could post
anything on the web,’ (Web Foundation 2012) which also applies to freedom from
censorship and surveillance. Bernes-Lee wanted the internet to be free from
discrimination; that is, everyone should be on an equal level. He said: ‘This
principle of equity is called net neutrality.’ (Web Foundation) Additionally,
the internet would be governed by wholly democratic principles. Instead of the
code being written by a distant group of experts, anyone could write code for
websites. Finally, the internet would also be universal; it would be open to
all people, regardless of their culture, their languages and the software that
they used. Different cultures would be able to interrelate and true ‘diversity’
would ‘flourish.’ (Web Foundation). In order for all of this work, a consensus
would have to be established, as everyone would have to agree with each other
to make these principles work (Web Foundation). However, these principles have
not been adhered to. Decentralisation has not occurred, as monolithic
corporations and governments keep the data of individuals. Individuals are
often abusive on social media platforms and discriminate others on the grounds
of gender and race. The internet has not created greater democracy,
universality and consensus, as groups become more polarised and vitriolic. They
create their own ‘safe spaces’ and do not engage with one another. Indeed, Stuart
Jeffries of The Guardian writes as to how big companies take over our
data, infringe over our civil liberties and how the internet has facilitated
the spread of misogyny, revenge porn, racism and bullying (2014).
Meanwhile, the library
of Babel claims to store every book ever written. Allegedly, it stores every
possible permutation of all the letters in the alphabet and its permutations
are nearly infinite. This essay will try to establish the characteristics which
it shares with the internet. It will start by comparing the workings of Borges’
library with algorithms of the internet. In Borges’ case, the library is of
such perfection that is of divine provenance: ‘[It] can only be the work of a
God’ (Borges 1944, p. 59). The library has librarians, but they are ‘fallible’
and ‘may be the work of chance’ (p. 59). Meanwhile, the internet is obviously
created by man, but it uses systematic networks which surpass human
fallibility. For instance, this essay has already established that it uses
‘Control’ and ‘Internet’ protocols. Indeed, Borges claims that the library has
‘exact, delicate, intensely black, inimitably symmetric’ (p. 59) principles,
which mirrors the kind of algorithms that the internet adheres to. However,
like the fallible users of the library of Babel, the users of the internet are
imperfect and abuse the principles that Bernes-Lee proposed. However, although
its principles are ‘exact,’ the library ends up producing books comprised of
pure gibberish. Certain books are ‘chaotic, random, formless’ (p. 60). The library
stores several books which are only comprised of variations of the letters MCV.
Although the books are largely meaningless, they occasionally include something
intelligible (p. 60) However, they are largely meaningless: ‘There are leagues
of insensate cacophony, of verbal farragoes and incoherencies’ (p. 60). These
books do not seem to be entirely arbitrary, as they are comprised of the same
letters and the librarians try to look for meaning in them. Indeed, the
librarians recognise patterns in the books: ‘Each letter could influence the
next’ (p. 60). This is similar to bots on the internet, which end up producing
gibberish. These internet bots are ‘software that performs an automated task
over the internet. […] A bot is an automated application used to perform simple
and repetitive tasks that would be time-consuming, mundane or impossible for a
human to perform. Bots are also frequently used for malicious purposes’ (Technopedia).
The texts in Borges’
library probably mean nothing, but this does not prevent the librarians from
interpreting them. Those librarians who do not look for meaning in them are the
exception, as there is a ‘wild region that repudiates’ (p. 60) looking for
meaning in them. For instance, many people look for meaning in the work of French
post-modernist philosophers like Gilles Deleuze, which are in all likelihood
meaningless. For instance, Alan Sokal wrote an article filled with gibberish,
sent it to a post-modernist journal and they published it without
peer-reviewing it (Goldacre 2003). Indeed, there is even a ‘post-modernist bot’
which produces texts that resemble the writings of post-modernist philosophy.
It is an automated application produced by coding, but it still follows
grammatical rules and the result is meaningless. (The website generated the
following essay when I clicked on it: ‘The Consensus of Paradigm: Subtextual
Dialectic Theory in the Works of Fellini.’) (Bulhak 2000) This is similar to
the ‘MCV’ books in Borges’ library, as they generate meaningless texts which
adhere to patterns.
Bernes-Lee wanted the
internet to be multilingual and cosmopolitan, a true bastion of diversity. The
same is true for Borges’ library, as it produces books which are a composite of
several languages. It produces a book which is ‘written in a Samayed-Lithuanian
dialect of Guaraní with classical Arabic inflections,’ Guaraní being an
aboriginal Paraguayan language. The library is cosmopolitan, as it is comprised
of a plurality of languages. It even produces books which amalgamate several
obscure languages together and which are multilingual. One of the five central
principles established by Bernes-Lee included universalism. Cultural and
political beliefs and software should not be an impediment to plurality and
diversity. Different cultures should mingle together, the software should
enable this and cultures should not be at war with one another. This is also
facilitated by the widespread use of English, which many people from different
cultures can speak. As Borges mentions in his story, this peculiar text can be
deciphered because it is ‘made up of uniform elements: the period, the comma,
the space, the twenty-two letters of the alphabet’ (p. 61). The book can
eventually be deciphered because most languages share similar grammatical
rules. Likewise, anthropologists, linguists and archaeologists can decipher
extinct languages for this reason (Pye 1988, p. 123). Indeed, Noam Chomsky
formulated his idea of ‘Universal Generative Grammar’ partly for this reason.
According to Chomsky, all human languages are innate since all humans have the
capacity to learn them, which accounts for the grammatic similarity of languages
(Nordquist 2018). Bernes-Lee wanted the whole world to unite, as the uniformity
of human cognition and language would enable them to communicate with each
other and overcome cultural and tribal divisions.
Although the library of
Babel and the internet are vast, each book in the library and each page on the
internet is different. Borges writes: ‘Everything can be expressed in all
languages’ (p. 61) meaning that every possible permutation is realised in the
library. Despite this, every single book in the library is different: ‘There
are not, in the whole vast library, two identical books’ (p. 61). This is
similar to the internet, as on the internet each page has a different URL. Each
URL differentiates one page from other pages. Each URL is comprised of the
protocol which is used to access the source, the location of the server, the
port number of the server and the location of the server (Technopedia).
Additionally, pages on the internet are written by individuals who all have
different DNA. Every DNA strand is different: ‘Each DNA strand contains a unique
sequence or code of genetic information’ (University of Leicester). However,
each DNA strand is made up of the same twenty-three chromosomes. This is
similar to the library of Babel, as Borges points out that each book is made up
of the same orthographic symbols (p. 61). Every individual, with his own strand
of DNA, creates the content of each individual page on the internet. There are
billions of individuals and, indeed, the internet is also vast, as it is
comprised of 4.45 billion pages with its own individual URL (Newcomb 2015).
The librarians who
populate Borges’ library share similar characteristics as users of social
media. The library harbours ‘Inquisitors,’ who look for a book which will
vindicate their particular worldview: ‘Covetous persons leave their hexagons
and look for their vindications’ (p. 62). This is similar to platforms like
Twitter, where people stay in their particular political tribes and safe space and
post material that vindicates their worldview. Indeed, Borges writes the
following about the Inquisitor’s books: ‘The universe was justified’ (p. 62). Indeed,
the search is highly personal: ‘finding his own book’ (p. 62). Websites like
Twitter are highly partisan and divided, where people from certain political
persuasions read the same news sources and are highly vitriolic to each other.
Indeed, people tend to read material that confirms their world-view, like the
Inquisitors in the library of Babel. According to Levi Boxell, this creates
‘enclave extremism’ and ‘enclaves of like-minded people’ (2017). Indeed,
empirical data confirms that like-minded people tend to read the same political
blogs (Adanic and Glance 2005), visit the same websites (Gentzkov and Shapiro
2011) and share the same political retweets (Conover et. Al. 2014) (Boxell). Whilst
Twitter is highly vitriolic and abusive, the Inquisitors in the library are
violent: ‘Strangled each other on the stairway. […] [They] died as they were
thrown into space’ (p. 62). Users of Twitter are also abusive and harassing and
their behaviour often violates the rules of the website (Mac 2019). Of course,
this violates one of Bernes-Lee’s central principles – that users of the
internet should treat each other as equals.
The Library contains a
sect that tries to create canonical books, which this essay will argue is
similar to the illegal activities of the website Wikileaks. There is a sect
which cannot access certain canonical books and these books resemble classified
documents: ‘That these books were inaccessible seemed almost intolerable’ (p.
63). As such, a ‘blasphemous sect’ tries to replicate them: ‘A blasphemous sect
suggested that all searches be given up and that men everywhere shuffle letters
and symbols until they succeeded in composing, by means of an improbable stroke
of luck, the canonical books’ (p. 63). This act is considered to be illegal by
the authorities of the library: ‘The authorities found themselves obliged to
issue several orders’ (p. 63). ‘Shuffling’ letters in this case is similar to
the hacking of confidential documents. Confidential information is important
because it secures the collective well-being of society, even if it infringes
on the civil liberties of the individual. These canonical books are
inaccessible and hard to find, like confidential information. They are lost in
a sea of vast information; it might possibly be concealed because releasing it
might be equally inflammatory. For instance, the Inquisitors kill each other to
find their vindications. The societal damage in the library of certain books is
enormous, as it leads to violence and civil strife. Meanwhile, Wikileaks is
illegal because it published confidential information on Iraq, Hillary
Clinton’s emails and information that the NSA kept on individuals. They did this
by hacking into confidential classified kept by government computers (Stack,
Cummings-Bruce, Kruhly 2019). They broke the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and
the Espionage Act (Groll 2019). Governments increased their surveillance after
9/11: ‘A greater governmental control of information, fewer procedural
protections for people linked to terrorism (as either suspects or material
witnesses) and enhanced governmental surveillance’ (Baker 2003, p. 549). In
this case, the collective security of the nation was considered more important
than the civil liberties of the individual. When Wikileaks hacked into this
information, it posed a threat to several individuals and put the collective
security of the nation in jeopardy, as it made confidential information readily
available to terrorists. The collective security of the library is also put
under threat by the activities of this sect, as it could potentially lead to
more civil strife.
The library also
harbours another illegal activity – the burning of books. This is a highly
treacherous act, as the ethos of the library is constant expansion, breadth and
totality. Burning books and reducing its scope contrary to its ethos. They are
called ‘Purifiers,’ which suggests that they are ideologically pure and that
they are fanatics. Their intentions are sinister and, like the inquisitors who
try to recreate the canonical books, blasphemous: ‘Groups of people would
invade the hexagons. […] [They would] condemn entire bookshelves to
destruction: their ascetic, hygienic fury is responsible for the senseless loss
of millions of books’ (p. 63). However, Borges claims that they burn
unimportant books, as they ‘eliminate useless works’ (p. 63). Similarly, the
internet harbours a lot of illegal activity, which is called ‘the dark web.’
Kristin Finkles writes that the deep web includes material that is not indexed
by search engines (2017, p. 1). Similarly, the book burners in the Library of
Babel seek obscure material that is not easily accessible: ‘They were spurred
by the delirium of storming the books in the Crimson Hexagon: books of a
smaller than ordinary format’ (p. 63). Meanwhile, the dark web is intentionally
hidden and cannot be accessed unless someone uses special software (Finkles, p.
1). The dark web is used for a variety of illegal activities, such as drugs,
weapons, stolen goods, hired thieves, hired assassins and child pornography (p.
9). The social harm of these kind of activities is enormous and covert, which
is similar to the activities of the Purifiers.
The knowledge in the
Library of Babel is all-encompassing and it is endless. For instance, there is
a ‘total book,’ which comprises all other books: ‘A perfect compendium of all the
rest’ (p. 63). Anyone who reads the book becomes a God (p. 63). This is similar
to Immanuel Kant’s idea of ‘total experience.’ The knowledge of an individual
is limited to his possible experience. Having ‘total experience’ would mean
that an individual would have transcendent omniscient experience of everything
that has ever happened. In other words, an individual would have to be God
(Scruton, p. 55). The libraries can
never find this individual: ‘Many pilgrimages have sought him out. For a
century they have tried the most diverse routes in vain’ (p. 64). This is
similar to God and religion, as God never reveals himself to his followers.
However, even this omniscience is not enough. Even if one were to read the
entire library, it would keep repeating itself: ‘The library is limitless and
periodic. If an eternal voyager were to traverse it in any direction, he would
find, after many centuries, that the same volumes are repeated in the same
disorder’ (p. 66). One reading of a text is not sufficient; each text lends
itself to a plethora of interpretations. Even if one were to read every single
book ever written, even then one’s knowledge of all of these books would not be
sufficient. The internet has aspects which are similar to both of the notion of
the total book and the infinite breadth of the library. The total book is
similar to a search engine such as Google, which encompasses almost the
entirety of the internet. It contains hundreds of billions of pages – it
virtually contains every single page on the internet (Fisher 2019). The web
browser collects all data related to the page. It also contains information as
to how often the page is updated, how trustworthy the domain is and how many
times the page is updated on the internet (Fisher). This is similar to the kind
of ‘total experience’ that the librarian attains after reading the total book,
as the search engine contains information about almost the entirety of the
internet and relevant information. Similarly, the internet contains endless
interpretations of books. It contains a vast body of secondary criticism on
literature, which proves that texts lend themselves to endless interpretations
and that multiple readings reveal new insights. However, the rise of blogs and
social media provides an outlet for limitless interpretations. This does
conform to one of the principles that Bernes-Lee offered for the internet, as
it democratises knowledge. For instance, there are 85 million users on
Goodreads, a website that lets its users to list and review books (Clement 2019).
‘The Library of Babel’
and the internet share many similarities. The internet was created to
disseminate and democratise knowledge, although it has not adhered to its
egalitarian principles. The internet creates many bots that produce
unintelligible writing, which also occurs in Borges’ story. The library creates
books solely comprised of the letters MCV, although they are also generated by
patterns. The internet was created by Bernes-Lee, who wanted it to be a
multilingual and cosmopolitan environment were different cultures would treat
each other as equals. This is also recreated in the short story, as the library
of Babel produces books which are a synthesis of several languages. The
languages are composed of the same grammatical rules whilst, similarly, all
pages on the internet can be accessed by the same software. Borges claims that,
although the library is vast, each individual book is different. This is
similar to the internet, as each page as its own individual URL and each page
is created by an individual with his own DNA. Although the internet was founded
on egalitarian principles, where people would treat each other as equals, it
has since led to abusive behaviour, particularly on platforms such as Twitter.
This is similar to the Inquisitors in Borges’ library who, like many Twitter
users, want to vindicate their particular world-view. The fights between the
Inquisitors are similar to many Twitter spats. This essay also compared illegal
behaviour in the library to illegal behaviour on the internet. There is a sect
that tries to recreate canonical books that cannot be accessed, which leads to
the authorities stamping it out. This essay compared this to Wikileaks, as they
hacked into classified documents. The other type of illegal activity that lurks
in the internet is ‘the dark web’ which, to a greater degree than Wikileaks,
poses a threat to society. This essay compared this to book burning in the
library, as this activity is also transgressive and occurs in obscure and
underground parts of the library. Finally, the library of Babel lends itself to
multiple interpretations. For instance, it contains a total book that
encompasses all other books. The individual who reads this book becomes a God,
although none of the other librarians can find him. This essay compared this
with search engines such as Google, which encompass almost the entire internet.
The library of Babel keeps repeating itself, since it can never be understood
even if an individual reads each book. This is because each individual book
lends itself to so many interpretations. The internet stores limitless
interpretations and its archive of secondary criticism is enormous. These are
the similarities that this essay identified between the internet and ‘The
Library of Babel’ by Jorge Luis Borges.
Works Cited
Borges, Jorge Luis. (1944) Ficciones. Translated
by John Sturrock. London: Everyman’s Library.
Boxell,
Levi. (2017) ‘The Internet, Social Media and Political Polarisation.’ [Online] Vox.
Available from:
Groll, Elias. (2019) ‘Julian
Assange’s Legal Troubles, Explained.’ [Online] Foreign Policy. Available
from: https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44101.pdf://foreignpolicy.com/2019/04/11/julian-assanges-legal-trouble-explained/
Pye, Clifton. (1988) ‘Towards
an Anthropology of Language Acquisition.’ In Language Sciences. 10:1, p.
123-146.
Scruton,
Roger. (2001) Kant: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
