Don’t Call Me a Genius

It’s the other way. A genius is someone whose IQ is 3 standard deviations or more above the mean. At 130, that is a higher IQ than 99% (roughly) of the population. Out of 7 billion people, that’s 70 million geniuses. Practically a dime a dozen. MacArthur winners? Way fewer. Chin up, carry on old chap.

A charming piece, less pretentious thann most in the Time written by academics (and surely less pretentious than its regular op-ed writers), but it also underscres the danger of "black studies" and "Asian studies," etc. Why? Because they are blinnd to the travails that have faced all immigrants or, as we call every angry person these days, "marginalized." Take a visit to the Tenement Museum and see how non-Asians lived. LEarn about the horrific discrimination against Jews for over a century in housing, employment and universities, about how "No Irish allowed" signs were as frequent in Boston as "no coloreds" in some part of the south. Ethnic pride has morphed into ethnic self-obsession, andn this likeable fellow, with all of his talent, seem ignorant of America's past.

I'm shocked by the number of negative comments about a simple introspective piece about how an accomplished writer is humbled by those who came before him. What exactly did this guy say or do to earn such ire?

Beautifully written. Thank you.

Mr. Nguyen, NOTHING I have read the past few years compares to "The Sympathizer." I agree that calling the MacArthur Fellowships genius grants is silly, but I think you wrote a pretty darn brilliant book. You deserved the award.

So what did you do with the money? If I was giving out million dollar genius awards or lottery prizes, I’d require the winners to spend all of it in 30 days. Too many of you guys end up saying you are going to buy your mother a house and save all the rest of it, which is no fun and ruins it for the rest of us. How about you, I hope you had fun.

Beautiful.

Funny, informative and well written. Genius got nothing on this.

Jesus, then don’t accept the grant if you don’t like the association with the term “genius”. Give the money back.

"That spirit also includes a commitment to solidarity, to not giving in to the selfishness and abusiveness for which solitary genius can be used as an excuse." This is such an important point. It's so easy for artists to use their artistic excellence to excuse a myriad of bad behavior that would never be tolerated in others.

"I wrote a dissertation on Asian-American literature from 1896 to 1996." Surely a genius would take less than 100 years to write his dissertation. But the piece is pretty good anyway.

Call it genius, or something else: exceptional honesty, reflection, decency, the spirit to endure and press on. This author has it.

As a university lecturer, I will now forever look with new eyes and reserve judgment upon those of my students who'd I would have otherwise believed uninterested and unlikely to be going places.

Dear Mr Nguyen Genius or not, you are a very good writer. Thank you for telling us about those that came before.

A white lawyer once told me he preferred Pilipinos as clients because "they like white people." Before I could tell him I'm Chinese he said "Most Asians don't like whites so they have Chinatowns, Japantowns, Little Koreas and Saigons." I told him my wife is white and never has mentioned any social distance or hostility from Asians whether at our daughter's school, her Asian girls basketball league, my family (all Chinese in-laws). My wife is outgoing and engaging. She takes the lead when she meets people, introducing herself or striking up a conversation. The lawyer asked if I had many white friends, or as he elaborated "beer buddies." I don't even though most people I work with are white. I'm aware I live in their world despite a robust Asian presence in the Bay Area. I asked the lawyer if he ever thought it might be the other way around: that whites are weary of Asians and enforce racial boundaries, which results in ghettos. The movie Chinatown starts with a warning that whites should stay away because it's a sinister, dangerous zone where morality is suspended (even though the story is about white incest and corruption). Nguyen is tactful not to mention that most best selling books by Asians reinforce the alien otherness that both fascinates and frightens whites. I told the lawyer his notion that Asian Americans don't like whites is a variant of "Blacks thrived as slaves." Hostility for whites is a choice. For Asians and "others" in America it's not.

"It's not that I'm so smart, it's just that I stay with problems longer." - Albert Einstein

"No, I'm not a genius; honest, I'm not!" There's a very distinct possibility I'm being too cynical here, but as Hamlet might say, "The would-be genius doth protest too much." The author sure goes to great lengths oh-so-ingenuously trots out the humble "standing on the shoulders of giants" theme, like giants of science & (countless Oscar winners) ratifying their place in the pantheon by thanking predecessors who 'blazed the path for my [comparable or superior] achievements. In many cases it's honest humility, but in many cases where you sense outsized pride or ambition, can seem like "humblebrag." The reason I suspect the latter a little bit is that the author only debunks the most obviously shallow conceptions of genius (MacArthur winner, famous multicultural, marginalized voice author, etc.), then tacitly invites the reader to retain in mind the more obviously legitimate conceptions of "genius": genuinely extraordinary writer, deserving inclusion among writers of the past. He implies "maybe I'm a hack"-- writing to a reliable niche NY publishers are known to embrace ('voice for the voiceless') hoping the reader will assume the self-doubt unfounded & indeed a sign of you guessed it: genius. Same goes for other possible 'humblebrag': academic underachievement, alienation, boredom ("remember Einstein?") "3000 hrs trying to be a writer." The subtle admission he was more into "being a writer" than writing itself, the comparison with underappreciated genius predecessors...

"Go to college, get an M.F.A. in creative writing, write about something Asian or Asian-American, be picked up by a New York publishing industry hungry for the next hot multicultural commodity and the next voice for the voiceless" Mr. Nguyen makes a very important point here. Books written by racial minorities in America are too often applauded for only for their "multiculturalism." My hope is that as more and more Asian-American authors (like the ones Mr. Nguyen mentioned, and Mr. Nguyen himself) put out work, "Asian-American" literature will become respected as American literature in itself.

There is an implication of insult here. How dare he accuse of never being at a Vietnamese restaurant! I've been to many! How does he think I became as exceptionally acculturated and brilliantly insightful person? Eating out, of course; the path to enlightenment. Sure, I sat alone every time because no one likes me, but that is a mere side note. And yes, I know the other implication here, that I needed a menu of pictures to select my dining choice. So what! We are in the McLuhan age, something you would know if you were among us as a genius! I love images!! And look at you, mister WORD guy, talk about behind the times. Get with it@!

Mr. Nguyen is one of the very few actual geniuses who won the McArthur Awards, which seem to go 90% to academics supported by their vocal co-ethnic or co-religional colleagues -- to the detriment of the true geniuses who need the most help for they are the lonesome types, outside academia or corporate world or any other support-network of well-intended colleagues to push them! Nowadays, most of the literary juries and magazines and publishers are actively seeking these hot commodity mutlicultural authors of certain races ) and bestow lavish praise on their more often than not atroucious opuses. Try to make it otherwise! There's a new form of cultural fascism at work and any serious author should leave the US until this fad will pass. I wish we would go color blind when it comes to literature. As it stands, memoirs are pretty much a market for who is the biggest victim in the multicultural and LGBTQ crowd, and fiction is a realm where ugly is beautiful and weak is great as well as the author is a petulant and vocal minority formerly "voiceless." Fighting yesterdays wars in literature, just saying.

A true work of genius seems to come through the creator rather than from....

I don't know Mr. Nguyen's work but loved this essay. At the end of it I was reminded of a quote from another genius, "If I have seen further it is by standing on ye sholders of Giants." I. Newton

There are plenty of good works out there by Asian-American authors, if you take the trouble to look for them. Some of my favorites include Dale Furutani, Naomi Hirahara, Laura Joh Rowland, Don Lee, Leonard Chang and Ed Lin, just to name a few. Han Suyin ( nom de plume of Rosalie Matilda Kuanghu Chou), a Belgian-Chinese woman who wrote in English and French decades ago, produced at least one blockbuster that made it to Hollywood, A Many-splendored Thing. I will concede, however, that earning one's living mainly or solely from writing is a tall order for anyone, irrespective of racial or ethnic origin.

I almost didn't read this because from the headline I thought it would be a lot of humble-bragging. Instead, it is inspiring, deeply moving, and one of the most important essays I've ever read...in any category.

To achieve balance, perhaps they should award modest collective grants to whole peoples and groups of people, noting in particular that the award is based on the fact that no one could be anyone without everyone. Or even BE, for that matter. Anyone could accept the grant on behalf of everyone. No one would be left out and anyone could judge simply on the basis of wanting to judge no one in particular. Anyone could get the grant as well, with the understanding that the award money simply means that anyone can pay for anyone’s lunch anytime no one wants one.

A beautiful meditation. As a university professor who deals with questions of justice, liberty, and equality in the classroom. i find the spirit of this meditation spot on. My students fall under such descriptions as Republican, Democrat, Anarchist, evangelical, Communist, Capitalist, Feminist, Fascist (let's be honest), and Nihilist. But when I articulate the position of those who think equality of opportunity ought be a criterion for determining whether or not a society is just or not, they fall silent. 'How many Picassos have been lost in the ghettos to poverty and despair? How many cures for cancer lay dormant because a parent forced their child into business instead of biology? How many solutions to climate problems remain invisible because of inherent bias against gender in STEM fields, and in particular in positions of power in those fields? " It is precisely because of the hard-core individulaism, pull yourself up by your bootstraps mentality of my most conservative students that, when faced with the reality of marginalization, my incredibly privileged students can enter the space the author of this piece creates. Only a handful, maybe two , of students lucky enough to be in college and who is even the slightest bit honest with themselves can say 'I got here by myself.' To read of Far, Bulosan, and Okada is to remember how contingent our position is, how dependent, and how vulnerable to power. I also leave my sleeping students be. It's not their time, yet.

Mr Nguyen's observation penultimate ❡ observation is important. Genius is not only of different kinds, it admits of different degrees and comes & goes in individuals. But even Kant committed the amazing fallacy of first describing it well & then going on to discuss 'geniuses' as people.

Genius in individual and social system? The clue to genius in individual and society is found most clearly in broad examination of the city historically. Individual genius is most often found in close association with a social system which first releases as much individual talent as possible providing a vast ground of ideas and talents, and what we call the great genius is most closely associated with the synthetic mind which can tie up all the loose ends, be a profound integration of system which would not exist otherwise without this great talent. True the "individual" genius is a misleading term, no man is an island, but the social system is not at all conducive to genius unless accidentally, and ideally deliberately, a ground of cross fertilization of many ideas and talents. Cities historically and all great teams in whatever field are systems of talent formation in which the great geniuses are the crown jewels. And this is why I detest national politics. Typical right and left wing politics, dealing as they do with very large numbers of people, obscure this issue. Rather than being a system which releases as much talent in various fields which prepares ground toward synthesis by great minds, national politics supports amorphous crowd and no great and clear minds as culmination of system toward still higher ends. This is also why great minds rarely mix well with large scale politics. They know the larger the group the more it looks for someone or something else.

It's not surprising yet still sad that many readers apparently missed the point of Viet Thanh Nguyen's essay which was not about whether he qualifies as a genius but to give a shout out to those Asian Americans who came before him and whose collective work and efforts as writers and Asian American Studies scholars have both shaped his own and provided him a community of which to be a part. Then again, their comments prove his main thesis that the voices of marginalized people--like Asian Americans--are simply not being heard. Genius or not, Mr. Nguyen's brilliant writing in The Sympathizer revealed a talent that belies his modest self-assessment that his success stems just from his riding a wave as the latest "hot multicultural commodity". With his talent he could transcend his ethnicity like so many celebrated Asian Americans before him who preferred to discard such identity labels as placing asterisks on the legitimacy of their success. That he instead embraces being an Asian American is unbelievably gratifying to me and countless other Asian Americans who have struggled against that marginalization.

Okay, I won't, but I will tell you that when my students and I read The Sympathizer, we were struck by the complexity, the plot-twists, the understanding history, the way in which the history was communicated, the connections the characters felt toward one another, the ironies of what the main character learns as the novel progresses, the stark pain of what most of the characters must suffer, the exploration of the morality of the Vietnam War, and the realization that without The Sympathizer, we would not understand that war from the most important perspective, that of the Vietnamese. Thank you for a great book.

Excellent comments in this essay, based on long time experience, with tongue in cheek as well. Thank you.

The Genius IQ Score is the formal educational achievement before The Brilliant IQ Score. Once a person receives Genius, then the person is considered for Brilliant. The Brilliant IQ is the Top IQ Score Level. The earliest a person is considered for Brilliance is at 50 years old. The earliest a person can be formally certified for the Brilliant IQ is at 52 years old. This is connected with School Grade Completion. There are 52 Grades in the Hierarchical School Structure. These certifications appear on a person's School Report Card. The Report Card can also be a Resume. ----- Congratulations on receiving the grant. The use of genius with this grant, is really a casual phrase, as opposed to a Formal Certification appearing on The Report Card. I encourage you to continue your Education and promote to the next School Grade, and someday finish School. I just finished about a year ago. I'm glad I don't have anymore Homework to do!

Not a genius? Viet Thanh Nguyen has forever entered internet heaven as a "genius". Type his name into a search engine and he will be a genius in aeternum. I, on the other hand, am not a genius, so I would not have let him snooze away the semester under my nose in my classroom. A student, genius or otherwise, who needs sleep, should find a bed and a room other than my classroom. The author might also learn some humility along his non-genius path.

We often forget that we stand on the shoulders of giants. Success is always based on the works of the silent forgottent people. Thanks for giving them a voice.

I have always admired smart people who can acknowledge the value of human interaction. Truly, nobody ever succeeds without it. With the possible exception of Isaac Newton; but, probably not. Even Newton depended on someone: Isaac Barrow, his mentor and close friend. Einstein’s work was also less the single act of a genius than a collaboration. Einstein depended on his wife Mileva Maric and Michele Besso to make his year, 1905, the year he published four world-shattering papers on physics, possible. Although Einstein is better remembered than Newton it is worth noting that the later’s genius touched more of the natural world. Or, perhaps it was because Newton was first. Still, one must give von Leibniz credit: although Newton invented his own brand of calculus Liebniz’s version is easier to follow and survives today as taught in college. Perhaps even Barrow had a hand in calculus; I read a treatise of his at university.

Lovely article, reflective and nuanced. Thank you!

The first one or two rounds of the MacArthur fellowships were awarded to some true geniuses. Now most of the recipients are those who have done good works like improving healthcare to needy communities but which in no way anything one would consider acts of genius. Even if the writers and artists who receive the award are to be considered geniuses, then where does one place people like Shakespeare, Dickens, and Tolstoy. Is there then a category of super geniuses?

Trying to be humble, yet over the top smart, at the same time This results in too smart by st lest half. Just enjoy your fame and relax.

““a group’s “distinctive character or spirit” and its “prevalent feeling, opinion, sentiment or taste.” It’s in this sense that I recognize and affirm the genius of an Asian-American spirit of resistance. “Ever since Chinese immigrants came to this country in the 19th century, Asian-Americans have been speaking up and speaking out against inequality and for justice. ” Viet knows it is dishonest to move in a sentence from Chinese to Asian-American and to claim the American exceptionalism of the Asian-American spirit of resistance. He is proud of his agit prop just as he brags on sleeping in class. Rebels don’t sleep in class. They don’t even go. The envious jealous of privileges they project on others and that they want for themselves sleep in class.

My sister-in-law is Vietnamese. She married my black brother, loudly proclaiming her love for him was part of her Vietnamese responsibility to make 'all the other Asians look bad.' Should would thank you for doing your part. Great article - a testament humility.

Thank you Viet, for disowning that abused label of MacArthur Fellows. I have 5 friends/colleagues who are McFellows, as some refer to it, and none of them would call themselves a genius (OK, maybe one).

When you read David Brook's book 'The Road to Character' which I have just finished you might substitute character for the word genius in this essay. Character is something you develop often through intense struggle and often does not require great intelligence or genealogy. But I won't spoil it with the punch line although you have described the road to character quite well here. I thank you and David Brooks here for your clarity and humor.

Seventeen Syllables by Hisaye Yamamoto is another great work of fiction, somewhat forgotten, that illuminates the injustice of internment. I don't know anything about the author, but she sure knew how to write. Genius is a mix of inspiration and effort, and it needs community to thrive.

Nicely said. It may take a genius to realize how inter-dependent we really are, and how much serendipity (plain luck) plays a role for our success in life. And being humble about our own contribution, and an impossible-to-pay debt to our parents and teachers for what we were able to absorb and, by sheer effort and dedication, excel and transcend our station in life. And if you could add some prudence (doing what's right, however difficult or hazardous), you'll become relevant to others, what you called solidarity. One more thing may be helpful, the ability to stop doing only what you like...and liking whatever you do.

I found this essay both lovely and hilarious. Are Vietnamese people loud? I did not know that. I do know that when one receives accolades it's good to step back and consider the context they exist within. We would avoid a lot of painful problems if more powerful people would take a second to temper their self satisfaction with a little humility. I guess it's a good thing for the rest of us to remember too. Thanks, Mr. Nguyen, for the stimulating read.

A very off putting title, not really what this post is about, even tho' it was used as a springboard for expressing the author's unease with being identified as possessing rare talent and a passion for his work. I won't call you a genius, it carries too many implications, among which is the deadly idea that you somehow can reach your final destination without taking a journey. As for being a solo voice, writers are solo voices: and when they tap into the heart of their own or their community's experience with skill, they often tap into universal human struggles.

As a scientist who has ventured occasionally into the world of the arts--dance, photography, and one hastily retracted short story that was in danger of being published--I've often felt quite blessed not to have to make a living in realms that are so trend-driven, arbitrary and, frankly, often superficial. It's comforting to do work that attempts to answer questions that have provably correct answers: right and wrong, no interpretations, no politics. And to a large extent, no aesthetics. The older I get, the more blessed I feel that I did not hear the call of any art. Life's been good. I love to read, and admire those who take on the (often) thankless task of writing. Even successful writers struggle to make a living at it. Regarding genius, I've known a few. My graduate work was in theoretical physics. My advisor for a time was a Nobel laureate. I worked with some of the greatest minds in the field. And I realised that, despite having quite a talent for physics, I was not in their league (despite the few well meaning classmates who speculated on when I'd win my Nobel). And I also saw that no amount of hard work would overcome that gap. That realisation, so early in my career, was an enormous gift. I've gone on to do other work that I find enormously satisfying, mostly outside of academia. I'm so very glad I did not spend a professional lifetime trying to live up to the expectations of others. So very glad!

It's intriguing that the author puts solidarity and solitariness at opposite ends of a continuum -- real genius, seems to me, would be one in which both are inextricably entwined, with human autonomy and social conscience going hand in glove.

"That, to me, is the genius I wish we celebrated more often — a commitment to carrying out our passions in such a way that elevates all of us." Isn't that the whole point of art? Do you write for the pleasure derived from the solitary weaving of words, or to share what you've woven? People will only buy your books if they find them somehow elevating. Genius is judged by the audience, and in the arts, the jury is out until the artist and art are forgotten. For the artist the actual rewards of creativity are all internal, whether they come from the act of creating or the power of the creations on other people. Oh, and some money for food and rent is nice.

A dead genius is a safe genius. That is why so many 'geniuses' - and many other incredibly smart, talented individuals who could contribute to society in unimaginably beautiful ways - live badly, die obscurely and (if, crushed under life, they bother to work at all) are discovered posthumously. A dead genius never says to a publisher, critic, dean, or anyone else whose (usually well paid) job depends on a big diploma and professional certifications, for whom a lot depends on discussing their work, "Actually, that's not what I meant...." A dead genius never gets lauded and laureled, then publishes further work which is not so well received or which is at all threatening to the status quo. Never underestimate the tendency of humans (particularly ordinary, unimaginative, insecure ones) toward safety. And never underestimate what that costs, both to the exceptionally talented and to broader society.

The puzzle with "genius" as a term meaning "exceptional" intelligence, talent or skill is: "exceptional relative to what?" Some high test percentile on a range of "aptitude" tests such as is used to vet eligibility for some "genius" club? (Nearly every kid at the several most exclusive colleges.) "Exceptional" relative to what? One's social circle? (Folks we personally know.) The routine practice of some class of cognitively demanding activity? (Faculties at CalTech, Julliard, Cambridge, Princeton.) The historical development of such activity-- perhaps as calling for some transformative innovativeness? (Newton, Beethoven, Keynes, Einstein.) The word is problematical not only because it has varied meaning, but because people use it as serves them in the moment.

good and well written piece. i spent 19 years on and off as a very obvious visible minority (i'm Caucasian) in japan. I've never been pro discrimination but to experience it--both positive and negative--certainly brings it home. there were stereotypes based solely on my colour. mathematical, sexual, emotional, body odour, work ethic.....

I did not read your article. Anyone who would use that title is not a person whose ideas I am likely to be interested in. I have known personally a few geniuses and read about many and have never experienced any who would use your title or its words, even in conversation. Of course, Trump probably would. He would follow them with "but I am one of the smartest persons in the world with a great memory."

the MacArthurFellowship stopped being a 'genius' award a long time ago, after it expanded beyond individuals in the fundamental sciences (e.g. physics) into the oxymoronic 'social sciences'. A coincidence? i think not.

Thanks. A helpful perspective.

“in such a way as to elevate all of us”is an eloquent and necessary plea. A caveat calling for corrections. In a toxic, infectious, tradition-enabled, WE-THEY culture and world. Which violates targeted, selected “the other.”Daily! Everywhere! By many.Who, not blind, are seeing-less. Looking-less. Hearing-hardened. Habituated by usurped-knowing and useless-understanding, many CAF (cope, adapt and function)as if fated to a chronic condition of complacent- complicity about what should never BE. Harmful words and deeds! Then. Now. Tomorrow. Yours. Mine. All of ours! It doesn’t take a process, outcome, or whatever, of “genius” to become aware of any of this.Or to choose not to do so. CHOICE. A group of letters waiting to become... to BE empowered. Word to deed. Saying to Doings.By each of US. Separately as well as together.