Coming to Terms: Genius and Blue Flame

Down the Rabbit Hole

Of my mind

I recently read this intelligent article entitled The Feedback Fallacy, written by Marcus Buckingham and Ashley Goodall. If you'll follow me into the rabbit hole, I'll take you on a fascinating mental trip in my head in italics.

Sidenote: No disrespect to men, but I was excited to see the name Ashley Goodall. I am purposefully focused on using more theories, research, quotes, and overall wisdom from women. In another post, I quoted the article and even put Ashley's name first. Women need more top billing. ALAS, after a google search I discovered Ashley is a man. Still, I love their wisdom, so props go to the woman who led me to the article Terri Trespicio, author of Unfollow Your Passion.)

In the article, I read the following quote:

"We spend the bulk of our working lives pursuing excellence in the belief that while defining it is easy, the really hard part is codifying how we and everyone else [...] should get there. We’ve got it backward: Excellence in any endeavor is almost impossible to define, and yet getting there, for each of us, is relatively easy.

Excellence is idiosyncratic."

Excellence is idiosyncratic.

And so is Genius!

What Buckingham and Goodall mean by that is that excellence is within us, naturally, and that it is undefinable in general terms because it is peculiar and particular to us as individuals.

It is up to us as individuals to decide what excellence means for ourselves. Critics will no doubt believe that this signifies the downfall of mankind, but the alternative we've been living seems to have accomplished that well enough.

My struggle to define Genius has been for the lack of these words, so succinctly provided in this article. Genius is also idiosyncratic!

As with excellence, it is us to each of us to define our own Genius, through its expression in us and through us. To do that without ending the world, we must redefine how we see ourselves as humans.

Are we broken (the old model) or are we whole (the proposed new model, and I argue the truth)?

There is no doubt we aren't perfect. Were we perfect, there would be nothing to learn, nothing new to experience. That's honestly beside the point, though it's an easy avenue for excitable critics of a wholeness theory.

To avoid writing a book in this one post, I'll leave the wholeness theory for further discussions and writings but suffice it to say that I follow the Positive Psychology that takes into account the "whole" person instead of an unnatural focus on either the negative or the positive, understanding that we are multifaceted and complex beings, and cannot be put into neat little boxes - no matter how hard "they" try.

The End of Standardized

What does that mean?

The standardized world held us together for a while. It made progress incredibly easy because that progress came through assembly lines and groupthink.

We have all been party to the benefits of that progress, albeit some more than others - the vast majority of us has a computer in our pockets, reliable personal transportation, greater access to resources - but we have all paid the price, albeit some more than others, as standardization meant adopting some norms that didn't serve the neurodiverse, the lower socio-economic levels, the alternately intelligent, or the deemed inferior sexes or races.

Now, the conversation is turning to possibility for all, to a growing acceptance of idiosyncrasy! Quite frankly it's harder for some of us to imagine than others. The groupthink is well-ingrained. But there is noticeable change.

I can't always see the possibilities myself as old habits die hard, but it excites me at the same time to see and hear the conversations with expanded thinking. I am definitely developing my Character Strength of Curiosity on this one.

Excellence and Genius are Synonymous

At least in this context

Buckingham and Goodall write, "excellence [and Genius] looks different for each individual, so it can’t be defined in advance and transferred from one person to another." italics mine.

In many ways, I can see how my emergent "definition" of genius looks a lot like the word excellence in this context.

The reason I named my business EDGx365 (the EDG being Every Day Genius) is that I believe we all have Genius (whether as a spirit or a characteristic) within us. It is my philosophy that we don't necessarily express that Genius to the best of our potential, which leads me to my work: inspire, motivate, and teach the principles and practices of self-actualization.

Your highest expression of Genius will never look like mine or anyone else's. Much of the work I do in coaching is merely providing a container of reflection for a client so that they can see who they truly are (Genius en potentia) and all they are capable of, and ultimately how that expressed Genius is necessarily different from everyone else.

Genius and the Blue Flame

On Different Terms

I don't know if the title I chose "Coming to Terms" is just me being clever in my own head - I never said my Genius would be understood 🤯 - but my aim is not to be convoluted nor confusing.

What I am getting at in this article, and in much of my writing and especially Word Wednesday podcast episodes, is all about coming to new understanding about words that we use, reframing them in more empowering ways.

Genius

Genius is one of those words in that it has in the past been used to refer to others, or if to oneself it was seen as pompous, and to prodigies.

It is a word that quite literally means spirit, specifically a tutelary or guiding spirit. It is inherently neutral, referring to a spirit that can be both constructive and/or destructive.

I believe humans want to be constructive (loving, life-affirming) at their core, but we tend to be both constructive and destructive in our choices.

We don't always clarify what genius is in ways that make sense. For example, tell me why we've referred to Mozart as a Genius when our standards of intelligence haven't included the musical? And musical and other artistic pursuits are being removed again from educational systems. The pendulum swings toward standardization even as it swings widely to the other side of idiosyncrasy and our creative nature.

The greater truths in this are that 1. Mozart expressed his genius through music (and probably in other ways that remain unknown), and 2. that there is a musical intelligence, along with many other intelligences. *

*See Howard Gardner's Theory of Multiple Intelligences, touched on briefly in this post.

You Might Not Think So, But You Are a Genius

Why is it that we have such a struggle with the word Genius? It’s much easier to apply the term to someone else, and yet there’s also a desire to be seen for our own expression of Genius. What is Genius anyway??

EDGx365Michele Jennae

Blue Flame

I use the words Blue Flame for life purpose. I love the image and the feel of the words Blue Flame, but I am also having to work at "coming to terms" with what I mean by Blue Flame and life purpose so that I can express these ideas well to you.

My husband has been pivotal for helping me to see that I need to be more precise, without falling into the aforementioned standardized traps. Thanks babe!

Like excellence and genius, life purpose (Blue Flame?) is not static. I refer again to Terri Trespicio's book Unfollow Your Passion because she does a great job at debunking the myth that life purpose is all about the "one sure thing" we have yet to discover, or "finding and following your one passion" at the expense of all else.

Genius has many passions.

Life Purpose should not be limited to one.

The purpose of life is more about exploring and experimenting on our own terms and consciously making meaning for ourselves. Are there guarantees? No. But likely there is much greater possibility for meaning and satisfaction in the multi-passionate approach than in the "one passion" fallacy.

I just had a thought. Is Genius the expression of a Blue Flame? Or is the Blue Flame the fiery expression of Genius? I don't know. I am working on being comfortable with not knowing right now. If that doesn't sit well with you, I apologize. For now, I will simply encourage you to come to terms for yourself.

Can you expand your mind enough to toss out the old bathwater without tossing out the baby?

Can you imagine a life of meaning and purpose that is expansive instead of restrictive?

I'm seeing an image in my head. This last question brings an image to mind. Imagine you're looking through a keyhole and through that keyhole is paradise. The question then is, "How do I get through the keyhole?"

That is the question that standardization has given us. We are all supposed to get through the one keyhole to the one paradise on the other side in exactly the same way. I THINK NOT!

POOF! And another thought. But what if....WHAT IF the door is an illusion? There is no keyhole, there is no door. We are already in paradise (along with the accompanying ailments of the human experience that comes with free will and choice) and all we really need is a spirit of curiosity, a willingness to explore, a fiery flame of burning desire to find meaning in the here and now?

Along with the ability to explore and experiment on our own terms and consciously make meaning for ourselves.

Bazinga!

Ha! Maybe I've just solved my own "terminal" dilemma. The Blue Flame is the desire to express the spirit of Genius! As Sheldon would say, BAZINGA!! 😄😉

Still, I encourage you to decide for yourself.

What ideas, conflicts, aha moments, or insights did this article prompt in your thought process?

Comment below or send me an email. I love the conversations!

🩵 Michele Jennae