If it’s revolutionary, it’s probably confusing

The reason, I think, that the history of human development has been one of evolution, and not revolution, is simple: anything radically new, is by definition hard to explain. That’s because it lacks context – there’s nothing else quite like it. Explanations are easiest by comparison.

And so we compare the revolutionary to the soup de’ jour, and the explanation dumbs our revolution down – a little bit each time, until we reach that magical threshold where it’s no longer indigestible, because the tide in the sea of collective understanding has come in.