What Is Genius? | Hacker News Reader

What Is Genius?

escapeintolife.com

13 pointsypavan5 comments

Interesting article. The author would benefit from reading (if they haven't already) some of Jung's (C.G. Jung) work on the collective unconcious and the archetypes that our psyches interact with. Artists do nothing more but tap into collective archetypes, symbols, and motifs - shaping them, clothing them, and casting them in the light of that craftsman's psyche. This is why people find such work captivating, both intellectually and emotionally.

Old mythos were no different but simply a facade over the fundamental (archetypal) drama that plays out within our psyche. The emotional power of Romeo and Juliet or Tristan and Isolde are other good examples too.

Genius is, to me, the ability to generate from one's own unique psychic (mental) configuration a model of their interpretation of a pattern, system, archetype, or motif true to the valuing meme their mind operates within at that time. Many see it as "exceptional" (the dictionary even uses it that way), something measured by the precepts of what is considered average; I prefer the concept of true self-expression as guided and judged by true self-knowledge. Genius is then innate and accessible to anyone willing to cultivate a defining personal purpose, skills, and talents; to introspect upon the questions of "who are you", "what do you want", and "why are you here".

I know this comment is a bit of a tangent for Hacker News as it has delved into psychology and a bit of philosophy. I find it relevant though, even if tangentially, because we programmers (esp. hackers) have a knack for holistic and systemic thinking. The two qualities that comprise genius.

EDIT: In my first paragraph, I don't mean to down-play the artist's creative ability, toil, and skill that goes into creating a piece of work.

Why the down vote? I obviously spent time writing the comment above, I think it would be fair to provide a counter argument or statement.

As in other areas, the non-specialist bows down to the opinion of critics as to who is a good or bad artist.

I have to disagree. Or, at least, why doesn't he mention the much larger group of people who haven't the humility to bow down to the opinion of a critic in the first place?

This is as far as they get: "a piece of art is good when I say it is. If you say it is good and I don't agree with you -- and if you happen to have credentials that make your opinion weighted -- then you are an arrogant bastard. But if you have a different opinion than me, and you don't have credentials, stop trying to force your opinion on me. Don't you know everyone is entitled to their opinion?"

Cringe when someone calls Twilight good or art. They will say it is good because they think it is, and Thus! That is perfectly sufficient for them. Push the subject further, then you become an asshole and why cant you understand everyone's opinion is "valid."

I like the word valid. I really do. But uttered by the laymen is contrary to the word's essence.

Everyone has to start somewhere, and reading the works of critics is of the best ways to start. It will take humility to go over something 10 times until you're in tune with the critic.

Criticism is analysis and a bunch of other things. You need examples of good taste and good criticism if you wish to evolve your artistic inclinations.

Reminds me of this TED talk by Elizabeth Gilbert:

http://www.ted.com/talks/elizabeth_gilbert_on_genius.html

Interesting talk but irritating, neurotic woman. She advocates dissociating self from one's creativity and manifesting it in some kind of cosmic force or god external to the writer to overcome the anxiety of past success. A popular strategy through the ages but a recipe for disaster nonetheless. A better strategy would be to examine her motives as to why she writes and whether popularity contests (i.e. commercial success) is a good standard of the quality of her work. Of course, commercial success is important especially for the artist but if the primary motive is to please the crowds (and its proxy, commercial success) whatever creativity you had will fade. cf. Hollywood.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com