There was an interesting article in Wired about two kinds of genius. As well as the content itself being interesting, it got me thinking. My own industry (computer software) is traditionally seen as somewhere for bright young men (ageism and sexism unfortunately intentional). It’s a little saddening looking around the office sometimes and thinking “How many people here are over 40?” and “Where does everyone go when they get over 39? Is this Logan’s Run (with 10 years’ grace) or something?” This is getting increasingly relevant for me as, apart from in church, I’m no longer of an age where I can be described as young.
There are the normal arguments against ageism, to do with the value of experience, diversity of views and so on, but this article suggests that some people are late developers – their experience isn’t just an end in itself, but is a means to producing better and better work.
The article is a bit like the hare and the tortoise, except both win. I’ve a sneaky feeling I’d prefer to be the tortoise in the long run in this instance though. It must be bittersweet to be the young genius who then peters out, unable to live up to their own reputation and unable to do the great things again. The lesser work of later years is probably still amazing, but no-one wants to know as it’s not the spectacular quality from the beginning. Dying young, before you fade, is a rather terminal way of protecting your reputation.
I’m obviously still in training for my late-developing genius phase.
“Where does everyone go when they get over 39?” I am wondering if they all go down the blood donorship centre. I called in yesterday and was by far the youngest person there, absolutely everyone being mid 40’s +, I would say. I wondered at the time what this said about age and wisdom.
Fascinating article, though I stalled at about page 3! I’m still in training 😉