Here’s a thought that hit me again recently – in order to know what I should be aiming for, maybe it’s best to look at who my heroes are. Anyone I’ve discovered and tried to emulate is almost by default doing what I want to do, even if I don’t know that’s what I want. On the other hand, not having a hero doing the things I ‘think’ I should be doing, should make me question that choice.
For instance, in theatre, I’m drawn to William Shakespeare and G B Shaw, not necessarily Richard Burton or Alec Guinness. While I enjoy the two actors’ performances and wish to emulate their work, I’m far more interested in writing great plays.
I know the names and works of a couple of dozen authors and a nearly equal number of artists – I can’t claim to know the names and work of more than a handful of architects or engineers. I neither know nor care about the names and stories of entrepreneurs or businessmen. Even the space explorers, the original astronauts, no longer inspire me. They were once my heroes – now, less so. The names of people I would consider to be my heroes are few:
Leonardo da Vinci – the Renaissance Man. Artist, scientist, engineer, futurist. A man far ahead of his time.
William Shakespeare – writer, actor, director, entrepreneur. He changed the very fabric of not just drama, but the English language.
Benjamin Franklin – scientist, writer, entrepreneur, politician. The original American genius, and, I would argue – the true Father of Our Country.
Ludwig von Beethoven – musician, composer, businessman. A man of towering passions.
C.S. Lewis – writer, teacher, Christian apologist, logician. A great-spirited man who could write children’s books as well as heavy theological essays.
Richard Feynman – scientist, writer, raconteur, artist. The guy who finally made scientists ‘cool’ to the younger set.
I note that the terms ‘scientist’(3), ‘writer’(4), ‘artist’(2) and ‘entrepreneur’(3?) show up more than any other in the list. It should come as no surprise that I lean heavily into these areas. Beethoven is the odd man out, but I keep him in the list because his music speaks strongly to me. I have gone into great detail about these and others I would consider ‘icons’ in my previous blog ‘My Influences’ – see more there.
I’m not actually trying to reinforce earlier conclusions I have made about my life choices, though I may have inadvertently started out that way. Instead, I’m trying to see if there are any other, less obvious, conclusions I can draw from the data. What can we say about these men that I have not explored before?
Of all these men, only two – da Vinci and Beethoven – were unmarried. Of all of them only two – da Vinci (again) and Lewis – were not ‘ladies’ men’, i.e. had more than one female partner. Leonardo is thought to have been gay, and Lewis was a confirmed bachelor until 50.
All these men (possibly not Shakespeare) were well known as geniuses in their lifetimes. Each man handled this knowledge differently, but they all started out being pretty arrogant. Each of them (except possibly Beethoven) became humbler with age.
I don’t know yet. Each of these men had wildly different personalities, lived largely in different time periods under different societal conditions and had different expectations. Some had an easy road to recognition; others were not lauded for their achievements until after death. All of them, by the definition of genius, were completely immersed in their ‘work’, to the exclusion of much else in their lives. Of all these men, only Franklin could be said to be moderately wealthy. Only one Nobel prize in the bunch – Feynman. Maximum number of children: 0 or 1 each. No conclusions. So, what am I after, here?
I think, maybe, what I’m looking for really is some form of reassurance. I know that my future is to be a writer. I feel confident in my choice of career. I just don’t always feel certain about my abilities, my creativity or my reception. Frankly, I’m feeling kinda shaky right now.
I have remarked elsewhere that it feels weird to me to be uncertain about my writing career, when I have been so certain (in the past) concerning subjects that I had no real knowledge in. I could hold forth for days on subjects I’d barely heard of – still can, occasionally. As a model of the Dunning-Krueger Effect, this rings absolutely true to form. I suppose that uncertainty is a good sign, but it’s still nerve-wracking. I no longer have any doubt in my mind that I should be pursuing a writing career – and probably always should have – I just doubt how good I am. From what I read from other writers, that is also a good sign. Makes good sense from an objective viewpoint but feels strange in the middle of it.
Another thing that strikes me is that none of my heroes (even da Vinci) could have had any clue that their ideas and work would become so important. They may have recognized in the moment that what they were doing was somehow ‘good’ or ‘right’, but broad importance is something that only others can determine – sometimes many, many years later. Even I know when something I have written is ‘pretty good’, and I’m getting the impression that that is all I ever can know.
So, getting the jitters is normal. I have to believe that my heroes got them, too. It’s not going to stop me, any more than it stopped them, but I cannot finally know how true or important my work will be for others. This is something I will simply have to learn to live with. Yeah – I think I can do that.
Be well
bcd