Waiting For Superman

You will give the people an ideal to strive towards. They'll race behind you. They will stumble. They will fall. But in time, they will join you in the Son. In time, you will help them accomplish wonders.

Max Landis, the brilliant writer of Chronicle, has done a hilarious rant about the enduring popularity of Superman.  Landis contends that Superman is boring because, in essence, he's perfect; powerful, wise, compassionate, constant.  He's unrelatable, says Landis, which is why he's not relevant to an audience that wants to see themselves reflected in their heroes.  This logic rings true; none of our heroes are perfect, no legend is without flaws.  The Greek and Norse gods were essentially Dawson's Creek with superpowers; every mythic character from Gilgamesh to King Arthur to Anakin Skywalker had their fatal flaws.  They've either died heroes, or lived long enough to see themselves become villains. 

That's why Game of Thrones makes for such compelling reading/viewing. 

Landis also rips to shreds the chintzy way DC killed Superman off for ratings, then just as quickly brought him back.  Superman didn't change, his world didn't change, the audiences felt ripped off.  The stakes going in seemed so huge, yet there were no consequences.  It didn't ring true; our mythic protagonists, be they of good character or bad, must change the world with their passing.  Whether heroes or villains, these icons must die if they are to be reborn as more than just men, if they are to become legends.  Giants do not walk the earth without leaving footprints.

It has been said that there are no giants any more.  The larger-than-life leaders who shaped entire nations with their great and/or terrible visions have been replaced with technocrats, tweaking away at the margins.  An aversion to risk has replaced boldness; messaging has replaced vision.  We actively tear down our icons, whatever the forum; in an almost Socratic way, we subconsciously seek out and exploit the chinks in their armour.  We mistrust superiority as an oppressive force that, because it must by its inherent nature be flawed, will lead us into temptation.

Yet, locked away in the deep recesses of our hearts lies hope that one day the perfect hero will rise, take our sins onto their shoulders or do away with challengers and show us the way to a better world.  It's one of the great contradictions of humanity; we crave assuredness and unwavering discipline in leaders, but know our leaders are only human and therefore fear the inevitability of their - our -  failure.  We know that when we place our faith in all-too-human unwavering confidence, we inevitably end up disappointed.  This is why we tear our icons to shreds; if they seem too good to be true, they probably are.  It behooves us to deconstruct their perfection and discover those fatal flaws before they are able to harm us.  The only leaders who can bring us to the promise land, truly, must be superhuman.

But there are no Supermen in the real world.  We're waiting for someone who's not coming.

Which is why we love come-back stories.  We feel as though flaws are ingrained into our nature; the only way to grow beyond our faults is by first succumbing to them.  As much as we want to destroy our icons, we draw inspiration when they rise from the ashes/shed the skins of their mistakes; in so doing, they provide us with hope that we too have that power.  Whether you look at religions (accepting original limitation and being reborn) or overcoming "personal weaknesses" (admit you're an alcoholic then strive to be sober) or any form of education (tests, coming-of-age ceremonies, graduation ceremonies, etc.) we have a habit of building rituals around the notion of personal transitions.  We need these moments of personal transcendence to be wrapped in contextualized significance if we're to accept them as having real social meaning.

It's no surprise, then, that we expect our heroes to fall down, spend time delegated to the wilderness and be reborn as role models.  It's through the process of failing that they learn to pick themselves back up and transcend normalcy into exceptionality.  If gifts are not earned, they are not respected and therefore, not to be trusted.

There's a lesson in this, one that we already know but most of the time choose to ignore.  Failure is inevitable; not something to be avoided, denied or trickled down to others, but sought out.  When we cut away (which is different than deny) all the doubt that holds us back and actively challenge ourselves, there's a bit of a multi-faceted hero in each of us.

Which is why the best leaders don't impose from without - they nurture from within. 

RELATED - saw this quote, had to post here: "They are like Superman emerging from the phone booth in times of crisis; their abilities to concentrate and solve problems go up."       

Could a Diagnosis of Mental Illness/ A Learning Disability Be An Advantage in the Knowledge Economy?

Yesterday's solutions are failing to solve today's problems.  Businesses and government are looking for bold, innovative, "out-of-the-box" thinking to create new opportunities.  Being untested and risky, these new ideas will need some determination and charm to sell.

If boldness, creativity, lateral thinking, risk-taking, salesmanship and tenacity are the desired traits for employees in the Knowledge Economy, how does one identify them?  How does one foster them in students looking at the workforce or employees?

There's a diagnosis in this.  All those traits are related to neurological conditions that have been labeled as "learning disabilities" (eg. ADHD) or "mental illnesses" (eg. bipolar disorder).

Have some doubts?  Look at this list of successful people who have or could have been diagnosed as "crazy."

There's a connection between health care costs and mental illness.  There's a connection between workplace absenteeism/productivity and mental illness.  There's a connection between mental illness and innovation.  Education and business are by and large missing the boat on the latent opportunity here; governments are spending oodles of tax payer dollars on trying to cure lead poisoning.

What we label "mental illness" is today's left-handedness.  Evolution has selected these alternative cognitive abilities for a reason; we are trying to cure what we should be accommodating.  That's not to say there aren't negatives that need to be properly managed - there are - but how much of an impact do environmental factors (friends, family, work, etc.) really play on exacerbating or even fostering the negatives?  Has that been researched?  If the positives are desirable, can accomodation and work/workplace design help to both mitigate the negatives and harness the positives?

Perhaps "crazy" isn't part of the problem - in fact, it might just provide us the answer.

Justin Trudeau Speech at Liberal Party Convention Published January 13th, 2012

Justin Trudeau in far more poetic language than I manage to sum up on social evolution, human potential, and the rise of the profrontal cortex. 

It's always a good feeling when wiser people than I seem to have hooked in to the same realities I see.  We just need that net of understanding to spread further, faster.

 

“Thank you all for being here. This is a really, really important convention. You’ll see a lot of people talking about where’s the Liberal party going…

What is most important is that we are together we are talking substantially about how we’re moving forward and we’re building up the confidence and strength to start to address the real challenges we’re facing. Not just as a party, not just the country.. But as a planet and a civilization, the 21st century is one in which the challenges we’re collectively facing .. Whether the environment or poverty, or social justice, human rights, or the conflicts that automatically arise when all these other problems come into play. The 21st century will be extremely difficult for humans, but for that very reason we must ensure that solutions can be brought forward.

We have come to a place where we can say we can’t continue with the status quo. We have to think of the best way to interest people, to address society and civilization. We can no longer simply assume that the world is big enough that if we took care of our own little corner of it the rest would fall into place. We can no longer simply assume that there will always be enough time to shift, to adapt, to change our behaviors,.

Humanity and the civilization that were living in right now with were successful because of short term thinking. Because of people maximizing the resources they draw on… We now need a whole new way of thinking that is much more long-term, much more responsive to the consequences of our small insignificant actions and much more mindful of the power of each and every one of us has individually to shape the society we live in.

At a time where we should be saying information is powerful, we’ve never been so power , we’ve never felts so powerless. What can an individual truly do to have an impact on the world around us when it’s so big, so fast , when it all seems so huge ?

… The crisis of relevance is visible most concretely in our young people. We get a bad rap. I know this. A bad rap for being apathetic… four cynicism…

But the apathy comes not because we don’t care about the world, but because we care so much. Because were frustrated that we’ll get to have our say. We don’t get to make that difference in the world, that were supposedly going to inherit. And our cynicism comes from the fact that we believe that the world could be better, that the world should be better. That we should be doing things differently and nothing seems to change.

That’s why every single speech I’ve given over the past 5 to 6 years to young people, to high schools , to elementary schools, universities, groups of Canadians across the country have included… A total cliché That young people are not our leaders of tomorrow. Don’t let anyone tell you that you are leaders of tomorrow. The “leader of tomorrow” is conditional: If you do your homework, if you get involved, if you did the right sort of things to succeed, then one day you become a leader.

No you’re not leaders of tomorrow. You’re leaders of today. The kinds of thinking that you can bring forward, the kinds of challenges of rethinking our society that we have – like Martha said – we need to be bold. You need to be bold. Older people get stuck in their mortgages, their career path, their way of what works, and what has worked. And that’s important. In all societies must be resistance to change for stability. But we also have to know how to question the status quo. How to challenge ourselves to be more, to think better, to think differently.

And this is something that has to come from every one of us here. All of young people who don’t feel that politics is important. People who prefer to join Greenpeace or Amnesty International or local initiatives within their own communities rather than play partisan politics. This is what we have to change And young liberals have to go back to all of the young people in your schools and colleges, in cities.. Young people who are not terribly interested in politics but want to change the world. We have to show them that politics is a way to change the world.

The crisis of relevance we’re living goes to a very, very basic element. Human beings have one basic core need. Once you get past the need for food, shelter, clothing, we are social animals. We need to feel like we are relevant. We need to see we matter to our tribe. And the accumulation of wealth, of fame and material goods can sometimes be an indicator of how important you are, how much impact you have your community.

But.. fundamentally …fundamentally … human beings get defined fundamentally by what they have to offer the world around them. We have a society right now of young academics, of young leaders, of young people who realize that the old way of thinking does not hold anymore. And we need to be bold. We need to stand up. We need to say, “ let’s rethink everything” because we know that the challenge we’re facing as a planet, as a civilization, can only be solved if countries like Canada — that have all the solutions at our fingertips, and all the advantages in the world — step up.

…We must put aside ideology… and start building on our values and our common themes and what works, in evidence-based policy. That is why Canada needs Liberal Party and the Liberal Party needs Canada. Thank you, young people for all you’re doing and dare dare to change the world.”