Sunday, October 28, 2007

Considered "g/Gifted," but not g/Genius

In a recent "Special Issue" of the "Smithsonian," a Fall 2007 issue to be exact, the subject of distinction is raised. On the cover, "37 under 36: America's Young Innovators in the Arts and Sciences." After reading several of the entries, I was puzzled as to how and why some may have made the list over others who did not make "the list."

Several years ago I took an I.Q. test and scored 140 points. Now, to place this score in context, Albert Einstein scored 165 points, or what is commonly now considered, albeit "systematically," a genius. What did my score consider me? I certainly, by these "measurements" could not be considered genius level.

Instead, I was weighed, measured and given the label, "gifted." As a 32 year old male--I thought, "Could I possibly make it in the 37 under 36" new edition-ever? Then I was reminded of last night's CSPAN episode featuring Dr. Ben Carson, Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital. In my early pre-medical studies at Trinity College (TC) I corresponded briefly with Dr. Carson via snail mail. Here was a man from the inner city Detroit area, or "Edge City" district, now a famed physician, speaker, author and all-around well-liked individual.

By the way--he received the afore stated distinction at the age of 30, but he has never been considered a "genius" per se. Admittedly, I am sure that others have merited such a distinction of "genius" that have yet to receive it, and vice versa; i.e. there are those that have been labeled "genius" accordingly, but do not deserve its extended privileges.

The title of his first book, given to me by my father, was titled Gifted Hands. This small volume encouraged me then, during my arduous studies in Organic Chemistry and Biochemistry at TC, as it still does via my present and onerous, doctoral labors in the Medieval Studies program at Purdue University.

As I see it--the position of the "gifted" is one of necessity and value. At this past Purdue University Convocations our president, France A. Córdova emphatically stated that her present goal is singular, "Purdue University's sole focus is to attain distinction-period."

In the wake of several accreditations, we are reminded to be useful and valuable. I have felt on several occasions less than stellar, and I hope to be of present and future relevance, but in this hope my ultimate aim is to promote those who are at the "genius" level and to make them accessible. After all, I believe this will promote spaces of interaction and development of my "gifted[ness] as well as my relevance."

Finally, I am comforted in knowing that age and distinction is not as congruous as we think. For example, Moses was utilized in his old age as was Beethoven and Bach. My aging friends then--I think we are in good company--the former was declared a latent "genius" and the latter, a hard and "gifted" worker. After readng this--where will you be situated?

F.

3 comments:

Slauticus said...

Genius is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent perspiration.
-Thomas A. Edison

I'd say that's even more so in this day and age.

Alexis said...

Perhaps the distinction between genius and gifted lies not so much in brain ability, but in the way we "gift" that ability to others. Thus, might gifted be construed to mean a sharing-of-intelligence, a gifting onto others?

k_grant_wilson said...

What is a gift if not shared? What is important is all people in the aforementioned texts shared their gifts to the public. So I definitely agree with alexis. K.