What defines a genius?

[Bob]

*Bob's brain starts cook as he debates on whether this belongs in Anything But or Misc, except it's not restricted only to piano but Anything But seems more like 'not quite music' so...* 

Innovation came to mind.  I was wondering what Mozart would be if he were born today -- Say they cloned Mozart and gave him the best music education so that's not an issue.  But the original Mozart already wrote and defined that style.  The cloned Mozart couldn't copy that.  And if the Mozart brain were wired up to really connect with that style (say his brain really worked well with melody and harmony and the "in" chords for that period), this new Mozart would be stuck. 

But if you make a new style and break new ground, that puts someone in the history books.

Possibly becoming well-known to the point that people know of a person's work.  But popularity isn't everything.

Being intelligent of course.  Having skills.

Being prolific seems to be important.  What if someone only wrote one piece?  A first work probably isn't that great or probably isn't going to be as great as later works they would create.  But is it required for a composer to share their work with the world in order to be considered a genius.

Or maybe there are different types of geniuses -- the genius machine and the "knighted" genius by society.

[gep]

I one read somewhere the quote:
"Talent is being able to hit a target nobody else can hit, genius is being able to hit a target nobody else can see.".
I thought it a rather good one!

gep

[goldentone]

I one read somewhere the quote:
"Talent is being able to hit a target nobody else can hit, genius is being able to hit a target nobody else can see.".
I thought it a rather good one!

gep

Yes, I was going to quote that until I saw you already did.  It's excellent.

[Bob]

After awhile a lot of targets are hit and exposed.  What do the geniuses do then?

[gyzzzmo]

Temporally 'geniusses' are made by the media and are considered master of masters temporally. True geniusses are still considered master of masters after a century.

[ahinton]

Temporally 'geniusses' are made by the media and are considered master of masters temporally. True geniusses are still considered master of masters after a century.

That would allow in several composers of - er - "modern music", would it not?(!).

Oh, sorry - wrong thread!

Best,

Alistair

[gyzzzmo]

That would allow in several composers of - er - "modern music", would it not?(!).

Oh, sorry - wrong thread!

Best,

Alistair

Not quite.
Because the media in general would have had to call those people geniusses then, and still now. And only a very few (sometimes rather silly) people do that to look semi-intellectual, not the media.
But that was indeed another thread, good thing you're not spamming this thread with nonsense too 

Gyzzzmo

[ahinton]

Not quite.
Because the media in general would have had to call those people geniusses then, and still now.

You're surely not seeking to persuade any of us here that the accolade of "genius" is granted solely as a direct consequence of media input and assessment, are you?

Best,

Alistair

[Bob]

I was thinking society might have to recognize them as a genius in order for them to become a genius.  If no one knows about them or they don't release their work to the public in any form, are they still a genius? 

I suppose there must be some people like that out there.  Unknown geniuses.

[lostinidlewonder]

One thing I do know is that there are a lot of geniuses that have lived and are living who are unknown to this world. I remember meeting a lady in her 60s who played piano at a top concert pianist level and she only ever played piano at home, NEVER anywhere else. She also could draw and paint, I saw some of her sketches and no kidding they are like Da Vinci quality. I asked her when she started painting and she said only a few months ago, never picked up even a pencil to try to draw ever before. But she is a quiet achiever no one knows about her abilities, her family also do not think anything really special about it she was never encouraged by anyone throughout her life.

I think there are many more examples of geniuses out there and those who are extremely secluded from society. Many maths geniuses alive today are social hermits and completely shun the public limelight. They are only interested in their work not the world. I guess many geniuses are quite eccentric also.

[pocho]

One thing I do know is that there are a lot of geniuses that have lived and are living who are unknown to this world. I remember meeting a lady in her 60s who played piano at a top concert pianist level and she only ever played piano at home, NEVER anywhere else. She also could draw and paint, I saw some of her sketches and no kidding they are like Da Vinci quality. I asked her when she started painting and she said only a few months ago, never picked up even a pencil to try to draw ever before. But she is a quiet achiever no one knows about her abilities, her family also do not think anything really special about it she was never encouraged by anyone throughout her life.

Which for me brings up the question, "Can EVERYONE be a genius in something they don't know then?"

[djealnla]

I one read somewhere the quote:
"Talent is being able to hit a target nobody else can hit, genius is being able to hit a target nobody else can see.".
I thought it a rather good one!

gep

Actually, this quote is one user's signature: 

"Talent is hitting a target no one else can hit, Genius is hitting a target no one else can see"

A. Schopenhauer

Florestan

[ahinton]

The punchline that Sorabji once added to a famous phrase on the subject is perhaps apposite: "genius is the infinite capacity for taking pains - provided that you already have genius"...

Best,

Alistair