Can Genius Be A Role Model?
Specific genius is absolutely unique, but genius as such, without a narrow specification, is not unique in the sense that one can always emulate greatness, one can always strive to be unique.
One must always call upon genius, rather than mediocrity, to be one’s “role model.”
Still our title question has not been answered. Let us approach it differently. Can a budding genius be called a loser on account of dying too young and tragically unfulfilled? By the same token, can an unlucky genius, unrecognized and unrewarded not just by his contemporaries, but by the posterity as well (a Janos Bolyai or an Évariste Galois, etc.), be declared a loser on that account?
Once again we are introducing a vulgar term into our discussion, but before we say no to it (to the question as such, but not as an answer), let us consider the opportunity it gives us to make a valid point of our own.
The only way for a genius to be a loser is by selling his genius to mediocrity in exchange for success... But in such a case he would no longer remain a genius, having sold his divine birthright for money.
But we aren’t finished yet. What about an evil genius, someone like Cain of the Bible (for an explanation of this see my earlier entry Genius And God), or even Hitler, whose world-historical importance qualifies him as a genius, whether we like it or not?
It is especially tempting to pronounce Hitler “a loser,” as he was clearly the loser in World War II, bringing Germany down with him. Indeed, Hitler was a big loser as a national leader of Germany, but genius hardly gets a place in this picture. Evil does not get to be measured by the win-lose criterion, as this amounts to its trivialization. Remember God’s words in Isaiah 45:7: “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.” Genius is part of God’s divinity. Let us not confuse Caesar with God. Caesar can be a winner or a loser, but God can be called neither.
When a genius is born, Mother Nature breaks the mold… For all subscribers to this commonplace wisdom, the answer to the question Can genius be a role model? ought to be a resounding “no.” Genius is inimitable by definition. Genius cannot serve as a role model.
Yet the title question of this entry is a tricky question. One does not aspire to write poetry “like Pushkin” or to conquer empires “like Alexander” or to solve mathematical riddles “like Perelman.” Yet one does aspire, if he is any good, to great achievements, one does take pride in a great genius being his countryman, one is moved by the example of a genius, not in doing what the genius does inimitably but in a terrific motivation to excel to the maximum of his capacity and beyond.Specific genius is absolutely unique, but genius as such, without a narrow specification, is not unique in the sense that one can always emulate greatness, one can always strive to be unique.
One must always call upon genius, rather than mediocrity, to be one’s “role model.”
Is Genius “A Winner”?
The title question returns us to the issue raised in Genius And Satan. The devil tempting Jesus in the desert was essentially offering him to be “a winner.” How many people living today will turn down a chance to be a winner? Winning is synonymous with success, the highest capitalist virtue. The ignominious title of loser is the most terrible stigma, an obscenity, bordering on hate speech. No wonder everybody is entitled to the blue ribbon; no wonder “Angelina-ballerina” is getting more “tens” in an hour than the total community of world-class athletes gets in a lucky year. No wonder everybody is a winner, as in “win-win,” as opposed to “lose-lose.”
Is Genius “a winner” too, then? Let us give our genius some respect by never asking this abominable question again.Can Genius Be “A Loser”?
Once again we are dealing with a question that seems perfectly appropriate when applied to normal people, but becomes ridiculous and even offensive in the context of genius.
It is easy to see that the crucifixion of Jesus was a victory for Him, and likewise a hero’s martyrdom always means the ultimate consummation of his glorious mission. At this point the genius-hero is no longer needed as his cause can now be successfully carried on by his talented followers, who themselves do not have to be geniuses to be up to the task.Still our title question has not been answered. Let us approach it differently. Can a budding genius be called a loser on account of dying too young and tragically unfulfilled? By the same token, can an unlucky genius, unrecognized and unrewarded not just by his contemporaries, but by the posterity as well (a Janos Bolyai or an Évariste Galois, etc.), be declared a loser on that account?
Once again we are introducing a vulgar term into our discussion, but before we say no to it (to the question as such, but not as an answer), let us consider the opportunity it gives us to make a valid point of our own.
The only way for a genius to be a loser is by selling his genius to mediocrity in exchange for success... But in such a case he would no longer remain a genius, having sold his divine birthright for money.
But we aren’t finished yet. What about an evil genius, someone like Cain of the Bible (for an explanation of this see my earlier entry Genius And God), or even Hitler, whose world-historical importance qualifies him as a genius, whether we like it or not?
It is especially tempting to pronounce Hitler “a loser,” as he was clearly the loser in World War II, bringing Germany down with him. Indeed, Hitler was a big loser as a national leader of Germany, but genius hardly gets a place in this picture. Evil does not get to be measured by the win-lose criterion, as this amounts to its trivialization. Remember God’s words in Isaiah 45:7: “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.” Genius is part of God’s divinity. Let us not confuse Caesar with God. Caesar can be a winner or a loser, but God can be called neither.
No comments:
Post a Comment