All I know is what I read
A while ago I picked up in the ‘remaindered’ bin (who can afford to buy books at list prices these days? Well, Paris Hilton could, but she’d have to first know how to read) at a big bookstore a while ago called The Know-It-All, by A.J. Jacobs.
It’s subtitled: One Man’s Humble Quest to Become the Smartest Person in the World. And it revolves around Jacobs’ process of reading the Encyclopedia Britannica in its entirety so that he “would know everything.” And, if he had a patina of knowledge about absolutely ‘everything’ then he would indeed be very wise. Anyway, without belaboring the point, the book is extremely funny and also very thoughtful at the same time.
And I understand where Jacobs is coming from. I too embarked on a similar quest at the same time he did, back in elementary school days. Like Jacobs, I wasn’t an athletic kid – “Hockey. That’s the game you play with that flat, black non-spherical missile, right?” -- but in some sort of spirit of competitiveness, I found that I earned certain kudos by knowing stuff. I became a veritable fount of smartass knowledge, but found in short order that elementary teachers don’t like to be ‘corrected.’ “Excuse me, Miss Jones, but I think you’ll find that the Black Plague wasn’t caused by rats, but rather by the fleas on the rats.”
Anyway, as time passed and I got into high school I began to dumb down. That was mainly because being knowledgeable was excessively uncool. I wanted to be cool because I figured you had a much better chance of getting laid if you were deemed ‘cool.’ I don’t know if I succeeded in my ‘cool’ quest, but I do know I didn’t get laid a whole lot. In any case, I was a bit of a fraud because even though I had regressed to using monosyllables and a lot of expletives, I was secretly reading on the side.
Then I met a really hot girl (in every sense of the word) who was also an intellectual, so being smart again was not only cool but also led to fulfillment of another quest of mine.
Eventually I went to university where I found I could be both smart and cool, and the only problem there was that many others fell into the same category, so the competition was stiff.
Ultimately, I became a journalist. This is a wonderful vocation for a knowledge
whore because any good journalist is an awesome generalist – a person who knows a little bit about a lot of stuff, as opposed to a ‘specialist’, who is a dweeb who knows a whole lot about one obscure little area and nothing about anything else. Generalists rule, in my esteem.
You see, I might be given an assignment to interview a prominent astro-physicist (OK, the choice was either an over-drinks interview with Cameron Diaz, or this astro-physicist, so my selection was understandable) Anyway, to talk to this guy and understand where he is coming from, I need to know something about astro-physics. So, I peruse the Internet or the library and find out just a little bit; mainly so I can use the right terminology with this ‘specialist.’ I do the interview and it goes all right. Then I have to write my story and convince my readers that I know a hell of a lot about astro-physics. I must, or I couldn’t be explaining it to them. Maybe it’s all a bit fraudulent, and it’s a thought to bear in mind any time you read an article and the writer ‘seems’ to be authoritative on the subject. In fact, he or she may know no more than I did about astro-physics.
Once a year our newspaper would mount a trivia team for the great Comox Valley Firemen’s Trivia Contest (mounted by firefighters with the proceeds going to their pet charity, muscular dystrophy). It was a competition that the newspaper team invariably won. Our stiffest competition came from the local college – the other teams really didn’t count. But, the college, with its dweebish ‘specialists’ resented the fact that a pack of lowly scribes could smoke all those highly-schooled folk of academe. It didn’t seem right, to them. They even resorted to cheating on occasion; or at least fudging their scores. But, invariably it was to no avail. Our team, the illustrious ‘Typographical Terrors’ would always take the day.
So, maybe a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but ask Ken Jennings of Jeopardy fame if it’s always a non-lucrative one. Ken Jennings was like London cabbie Fred Housego who, about 25-years ago smoked all the academic competition on the British quiz, Mastermind.
We rule, Ken and Fred and I, not to mention all my blogger contacts!
It’s subtitled: One Man’s Humble Quest to Become the Smartest Person in the World. And it revolves around Jacobs’ process of reading the Encyclopedia Britannica in its entirety so that he “would know everything.” And, if he had a patina of knowledge about absolutely ‘everything’ then he would indeed be very wise. Anyway, without belaboring the point, the book is extremely funny and also very thoughtful at the same time.
And I understand where Jacobs is coming from. I too embarked on a similar quest at the same time he did, back in elementary school days. Like Jacobs, I wasn’t an athletic kid – “Hockey. That’s the game you play with that flat, black non-spherical missile, right?” -- but in some sort of spirit of competitiveness, I found that I earned certain kudos by knowing stuff. I became a veritable fount of smartass knowledge, but found in short order that elementary teachers don’t like to be ‘corrected.’ “Excuse me, Miss Jones, but I think you’ll find that the Black Plague wasn’t caused by rats, but rather by the fleas on the rats.”
Anyway, as time passed and I got into high school I began to dumb down. That was mainly because being knowledgeable was excessively uncool. I wanted to be cool because I figured you had a much better chance of getting laid if you were deemed ‘cool.’ I don’t know if I succeeded in my ‘cool’ quest, but I do know I didn’t get laid a whole lot. In any case, I was a bit of a fraud because even though I had regressed to using monosyllables and a lot of expletives, I was secretly reading on the side.
Then I met a really hot girl (in every sense of the word) who was also an intellectual, so being smart again was not only cool but also led to fulfillment of another quest of mine.
Eventually I went to university where I found I could be both smart and cool, and the only problem there was that many others fell into the same category, so the competition was stiff.
Ultimately, I became a journalist. This is a wonderful vocation for a knowledge
whore because any good journalist is an awesome generalist – a person who knows a little bit about a lot of stuff, as opposed to a ‘specialist’, who is a dweeb who knows a whole lot about one obscure little area and nothing about anything else. Generalists rule, in my esteem.
You see, I might be given an assignment to interview a prominent astro-physicist (OK, the choice was either an over-drinks interview with Cameron Diaz, or this astro-physicist, so my selection was understandable) Anyway, to talk to this guy and understand where he is coming from, I need to know something about astro-physics. So, I peruse the Internet or the library and find out just a little bit; mainly so I can use the right terminology with this ‘specialist.’ I do the interview and it goes all right. Then I have to write my story and convince my readers that I know a hell of a lot about astro-physics. I must, or I couldn’t be explaining it to them. Maybe it’s all a bit fraudulent, and it’s a thought to bear in mind any time you read an article and the writer ‘seems’ to be authoritative on the subject. In fact, he or she may know no more than I did about astro-physics.
Once a year our newspaper would mount a trivia team for the great Comox Valley Firemen’s Trivia Contest (mounted by firefighters with the proceeds going to their pet charity, muscular dystrophy). It was a competition that the newspaper team invariably won. Our stiffest competition came from the local college – the other teams really didn’t count. But, the college, with its dweebish ‘specialists’ resented the fact that a pack of lowly scribes could smoke all those highly-schooled folk of academe. It didn’t seem right, to them. They even resorted to cheating on occasion; or at least fudging their scores. But, invariably it was to no avail. Our team, the illustrious ‘Typographical Terrors’ would always take the day.
So, maybe a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but ask Ken Jennings of Jeopardy fame if it’s always a non-lucrative one. Ken Jennings was like London cabbie Fred Housego who, about 25-years ago smoked all the academic competition on the British quiz, Mastermind.
We rule, Ken and Fred and I, not to mention all my blogger contacts!
Labels: avid reader, generalists, smartass
13 Comments:
I love trivia. It makes me seem so much smarter than I actually am.
People in my profession tend to be dilettantes too. Maybe I should put a team together and enter the Comox trivia challenge. My brain is a warehouse of trivial, virtually irrelevant stuff. Much to the annoyance of my husband.
V.
And, much to the annoyance of my wife, too, dear Voyager. Yes, and in light of what you do (and I'm not revealing what)I expect the same tools would apply.
And, dear Jazz, you have it to a T. Mucho trivia knowledge makes one seem ever-so-smart. But, you know it helps with Jeopardy and the NYT crossword.
Interesting - and agree totally with the instant expert stuff.
hi ian, my daughter used to read the dictionary when she was in elementary school. i thought that was so funny.
a generalist is what i'm striving to be so i can go on jeopardy one day and do well. i always thought if i know a little about everything, i'd do alright. i love crossword puzzles too, so that should aid in my pursuit.
it's funny because i started writing my comments here before i finished reading the post. then i see you mention jeopardy and ken jennings. i'm glad i'm one of your blogger contacts. yes, i rule!!! and i say that ever so humbly.
I remember the taxi driver on Mastermind ... I still lived at home in England and we were all glued to the box routing for him!
I love interviewing people and agree with you on the generalist POV ... you get to constantly explore new things and discover new interests that you can learn more about.
Hi Vicki. I was living in England at that time, and I became intrigued by his prowess in Shakespeare's plays, I believe it was. And I agree with you about the things one can learn from interviewing.
Ian
"Typographical Terrors" I love that!
I wanna join! Lord knows I reign at typographical terror!
Great post Ian, right after my own heart.
Great post Ian, trivia is dear to my heart. If t here was a way of making money with it I'd be rich. I've always thought that we generalists are closer to the renaissance ideal, where your intellect would range far and wide across the fields of knowledge. So we aren't trivia nuts but renaissance men and women.
Nothing like the mix of intellect, wit and a playful spirit. That is waaaay cool.
Do our young people today know what encyclopedia's are? I remember my father buying us children a 20-volume series of the Britannica. I actually used to enjoy sitting and reading it, being a bit of a swot. I wish I could remember what I had red though.
This is very tangential (but as you know, that's my specialty), but I had to tell you. As a kid, I read the "Encylcopedia Brown" series, about a boy who read the entire encylcopedia set at home and used all that information to solve mysteries. In one of the early books, he mentioned that his father's favorite book was "Three Men in a Boat," and that's why I looked up that book to read.
As a fellow journalist, I'm the same - jack of all trades and master of none! I found that, working in local press, I was writing around 30 stories a week, often on 30 different subjects. Nowadays, I work solely on articles related to the oil and gas industry, which means I actually get a chance to learn about a specific area. But I have to agree that people like us with a broad-ranging general knowledge are far more interesting than specialists!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home