Defining a Genius and Its Analysis

Genius is, undoubtedly, exceedingly rare and distinctive, but still shares an inevitable, powerful, quality for both ordinary people and professionals (Robinson, 1). All working biologists still need to look at Darwinian concepts, which, to this day, prompt experiments and fresh thinking worldwide. The same esteem is given to Einstein's theories in the world of physics, Mozart's harmonies and melodies in the world of music, as to Shakespeare's plays in the literary world -- all these are examples that continue to inspire individuals in cultures and languages highly dissimilar to their places of origin. While 'geniuses' in recent times come and go, people are fascinated with the concept of genius. Genius is what we call, in simple terms, the sort of work which rises above reputation, fame, celebrity and fashion, i.e., as opposed to period pieces. It, somehow, transcends the place and time of origin (Robinson, 10).

Robinson explains that it is difficult to decide what defines genius, as well as who can be called a genius. While there are some exceptions, like Einstein or Newton whose brilliance cannot be disputed, there are other cases wherein one may doubt the validity of such a claim. An interesting point stated by Robinson in this regard is that genius, in some instances, is disputed (e.g. Picasso), whereas in others, is undisputed (e.g. Mozart). One may feel shocked as to why Picasso's talent is questioned; Harold Bloom claims that, in his personal opinion (which is probably shared by very few others) Mozart's talent seems rather trivial compared to Picasso. Another case of subjectivity in this regard is the constant reference to English writer, Virginia Woolf by Robinson. Bloom believes that Woolf was not a genius, but more of a celebrity (Harold, 35).

Genius is a term applied to so many diverse kinds of people, i.e. there is a lot of indefiniteness in its application. So many individuals are labeled as 'geniuses' by their peers, but not by biographers. If one believes genius to be characterized by an inspiration, or a flash of ideas originating from supposedly paranormal sources, or an all-consuming, inordinate desire to achieve an end, it can be said to be perilously close to the hearing of voices by insane persons, their deliriums, or their fixations. This cannot possibly be an advantageous faculty, and one may not desire to inherit such traits. With regards to inheritance of natural ability, human history and evolution unquestionably state that intellectual and moral standing of sane people of the future will be no less superior to that of the present day. Individuals of the high and above-average ability level afford an ample supply of ability level which is, currently, exceedingly rare and keenly sought (Robinson, 74; Harold, 33).

Furthermore, an individual with a lofty seat in the Cabinet may not be presumed to correspondingly possess exceptional natural ability, as statesmanship is not counted among open professions. This was more so when the rich and affluent dominated the English political scene -- exceptionally talented young men were eagerly sought and included in Parliament; here, contending parties used them in gladiatorial battle. These, however, were exceptions; even in those days, a life in parliament was not an open career, as only chosen youths were allowed to compete. However, just as in all other professions, nobody except the most unique and extraordinary can succeed at parliament, unless he/she has been engaged in the field for a long time (Harold, 83-4; Robinson, 94).