The ‘Expert Genius Hero’ – A Sign of our Times?
November 10, 2002 | 12:00am
When it comes to describing people we’ve just met, a prospective date, fellow employees at the office, or the "boss," the most abused term is the word "nice." How often does it creep into our vocabulary, used as a catch-all adjective for a myriad of situations and people? It’s used so liberally, it has lost all true descriptive powers.
Nowadays, several other words like "expert," "hero," and "genius" are used just as liberally. They’re ready-to-use and bandied about, thanks to mass media, PR practitioners and marketing outfits. It’s a handy way of bestowing credibility to a wide range of persons who may or may not deserve them. We’re such complacent and giving people, we accept these labels without batting an eyelash and associate them with persons without any question.
Yup. Nowadays practically anyone is an expert, genius or hero! All it takes is being referred to as one in some press release or TV show and presto! No questions asked, no doubts or eyebrows raised. In this age of mediocrity, hype truly is King. And if one has celebrity status, thanks to some show business or political connection, your ticket is truly validated.
Don’t get me wrong. I know these people do provide a service and may have something worthwhile to contribute or say, and perhaps I am being a stickler for semantics. But excuse the natural cynic in me, but I think in the past, terms like the three really carried power and bestowed a sense of awe to the person being described as such; nowadays, thanks to its liberal usage, the terms have lost all true meaning.
For example, why are parents, none of whose children are older than seven or eight, "experts" of parenting? Isn’t that a case of "premature elocution?" In other countries, someone becomes an expert after years of education in Child Psychology, or getting a Masters or Doctorate in the field, or spending years of practical research with different types of kids and submitting dissertations or papers on the subject. He or she then becomes an acknowledged authority on the subject and when coupled with first-hand experience of raising children of their own, we say they’ve combined theoretical and practical knowledge on the matter.
At the very least, I’d rather grant the label "expert" to someone whose kids are now in their teens (or even older) who we can evidently see as living proof of how the parent’s notions of child-rearing are eminently successful. To call someone whose kids are still below 10 an expert is, for me, akin to putting the cart before the horse or counting the eggs before they’ve hatched. These parents may have invaluable words of advice or can spout theories that do make perfect sense, they can be recognized voices or speakers on parenting, but the term "expert" seems to be too loosely applied. That’s like saying being a movie star naturally bestows someone the power to be an "expert" hostage negotiator (Take a bow, Robin and Assunta. Why don’t they lecture the Integrated National Police?).
The term "genius" was, in the not too distant past, something that could be measured or quantified via IQ testing and accomplishments. Nowadays, just being street smart or having a stroke of luck or genius and you’re it–a genius. Think about it–there is being ingenious and that still doesn’t make one a genius. Erap was ingenious in parlaying his masa appeal and showbiz career to capture the presidency; as were basketball players, TV newscasters and movie stars who sought political office. Does that now automatically make them geniuses? Does a successful business empire make one a genius? Yet, we are so ready to confer the term with qualifiers; as in "advertising genius," "marketing genius," "PR genius." Come on, give me a break! Don’t swallow everything that’s fed to you. Know the hidden agenda that may exist, the motives that lie beneath.
Let’s not forget it wasn’t so long ago that universities were falling over one other wanting to be recognized as the institution President Estrada would consider himself an alumnus of. They’d even confer honorary degrees and doctorates to make him forget they kicked him out, or that he never graduated. And now?
Ass-licking is a very refined art here in our country, just as refined as revisionism when wheel-turning time comes around. In our haste to please or hype up someone’s creditable but mundane reality, it’s so easy to throw up the word "genius" and watch it stick!
As for "hero," when I was a child it really meant something to be referred to as a "hero." One had accomplished something really exemplary, saved someone or exhibited superhuman self-sacrifice for the benefit of others. Now, we’re so down on ourselves, we’re ready to confer hero status on just about anyone in the news. To survive a hostage situation, to be submissive and stay alive, does that make one a hero? I don’t have anything against her, but was it merely her being an American that made our government go all-out and treat Gracia Burnham as a heroine? What about all the Filipinos who have been taken hostage and survived? Why were they not given the same kind of attention, conferred hero status? Again, what did she actually do while in captivity that was so "heroic"? I am glad she made it through her ordeal, so don’t get riled up thinking I have no respect for what she went through. What bothers me is how the term "hero" was so glibly used and accepted.
Mind you, we are not alone in doing this. To this day, I don’t understand how Lady Di and Mother Teresa are spoken of with the same reverence and awe. Even Jackie Onassis–she may have been a great woman, a style icon, one plucky lady and all that but for her or Diana to be emblematic as heroines for our times only makes me sad for our times. And isn’t it funny how in death we are so ready to mythologize and raise to heaven some person? Before her untimely death–which, let’s face it–was a road accident waiting to happen (what are you doing speeding in the middle of a city underground thoroughfare? Surely, safety of the passengers supersede avoiding paparazzi) we admired Lady Di and pitied her as well. Sad she had to marry into an empty relationship (but that’s not unique) and she did take the time out to do charity work while enjoying a jet set life; but not many would say she was their idea of a "hero." So you have this very unfortunate fatal accident and why is she suddenly a heroine? Tragic figure, yes; heroine?
Exalting and admiring Mother Teresa I understand, ditto for Florence Nightingale, Gabriela Silang, and Joan of Arc. But let’s be circumspect about what is and who is a true hero for our times; otherwise, as I said, it’s more a reflection of our times and our desperation to find the "extraordinary" than it is the real accomplishments of the person being bestowed the special honor.
And yes, you don’t have to agree with everything I say; but if this slice of wry bread has become food for thought, I’m content.
Well, it’s come to this–even the traditional politicians are so disgusted with their own brand of politics, they’re ready to junk long harbored personal ambition and years of public service, just to get behind a "winner." How else can we explain the opposition’s moves in drafting FPJ for our next presidential elections?
I love it! At least, Reagan had his years as governor of California and Erap his mayoralty of San Juan. With FPJ, we get a true "lamb in the woods," fueled by his own notions of what grandeur may lie ahead, lip-synching to the overture composed and orchestrated by the members of the Opposition. He may be playing coy for now; waiting for the right "carrot."
Unsolicited advice, but if he is serious, he better put in the time to familiarize himself with national issues, the economy and currency problems, the insurgency thorn in our collective national butt, the peace and order… ahh! Forget it! He and everyone else are hoping all it’ll take is his officially tossing his hat (yes, cowboy) into the political ring and everything will fall into place. That is, until he actually assumes office. Then if my advice goes unheeded, he’ll be dependent on the traditional politicians and technocrats, who do we doubt, all have their own private agendas.
The rebirth of the age of Rasputins, Richelieus and "powers behind the throne" is just around the corner. Isn’t it so-sad-it’s-funny how these Opposition politicians would berate former President Aquino for lacking administrative acumen and hands-on government skills. At best, they’d admit she may have been necessary, the right person at that particular time for this country, but sorely muffed the opportunity because of inexperience. And yet, they’re now rallying behind FPJ. Hmmm! Did I really miss something there? Or did they?
I talk to people who try to understand or are sympathetic to his running and what do I get? He’s clean, he only has one wife, he’s not Erap at all. Whoopee! We are so ready to grasp at straws, Hail to the Cheap! They can’t say with certainty he’s intelligent, they can’t point out a single record of public duty or administrative quality, and they can only quote box-office figures (which by the way have waned over the last few years). Yup, if this is our version of presidential timber, is it any wonder we’re a severely denuded and deforested nation (and yes, denuded does sound very much like deluded from where I’m sitting).
Sometimes I wonder what people like Sen. Ed Angara really feel, knowing that their own plans will in reality only get them so far, and having to accept that someone like FPJ is their best bet. Senator Angara has all these years of public service, has proven to be knowledgeable and adept in handling situations of national impact, has dealt regularly with counterparts from other nations, and the list goes on. For him, is it lip service or true belief that FPJ is the man to lead our country in 2004? If true belief, what then were the years he spent toiling in the back bench and political caucuses all for? The nights cramming on issues and options and alternatives, creating models of agricultural growth, examining foreign and national policy? I give up, you tell me. In the meantime, the FPJ juggernaut just picks up speed.
Here we go again! Instead of having an election based on platform and issues, with two or more individuals of proven public service vying for the post, we’re heading for a popularity contest–the King versus the pseudo-Ate Guy, an incumbent that would use subliminal Nora Aunor references. Malacañang is still Tinseltown… without the tinsel.
(For comments I can choose to ignore and suggestions I can disregard–just joking!–perhaps?–e-mail me at peopleasia@qinet.net or drop me a line at The Philippine STAR (Allure Section), Railroad St., Port Area, Manila.)
Nowadays, several other words like "expert," "hero," and "genius" are used just as liberally. They’re ready-to-use and bandied about, thanks to mass media, PR practitioners and marketing outfits. It’s a handy way of bestowing credibility to a wide range of persons who may or may not deserve them. We’re such complacent and giving people, we accept these labels without batting an eyelash and associate them with persons without any question.
Yup. Nowadays practically anyone is an expert, genius or hero! All it takes is being referred to as one in some press release or TV show and presto! No questions asked, no doubts or eyebrows raised. In this age of mediocrity, hype truly is King. And if one has celebrity status, thanks to some show business or political connection, your ticket is truly validated.
Don’t get me wrong. I know these people do provide a service and may have something worthwhile to contribute or say, and perhaps I am being a stickler for semantics. But excuse the natural cynic in me, but I think in the past, terms like the three really carried power and bestowed a sense of awe to the person being described as such; nowadays, thanks to its liberal usage, the terms have lost all true meaning.
For example, why are parents, none of whose children are older than seven or eight, "experts" of parenting? Isn’t that a case of "premature elocution?" In other countries, someone becomes an expert after years of education in Child Psychology, or getting a Masters or Doctorate in the field, or spending years of practical research with different types of kids and submitting dissertations or papers on the subject. He or she then becomes an acknowledged authority on the subject and when coupled with first-hand experience of raising children of their own, we say they’ve combined theoretical and practical knowledge on the matter.
At the very least, I’d rather grant the label "expert" to someone whose kids are now in their teens (or even older) who we can evidently see as living proof of how the parent’s notions of child-rearing are eminently successful. To call someone whose kids are still below 10 an expert is, for me, akin to putting the cart before the horse or counting the eggs before they’ve hatched. These parents may have invaluable words of advice or can spout theories that do make perfect sense, they can be recognized voices or speakers on parenting, but the term "expert" seems to be too loosely applied. That’s like saying being a movie star naturally bestows someone the power to be an "expert" hostage negotiator (Take a bow, Robin and Assunta. Why don’t they lecture the Integrated National Police?).
The term "genius" was, in the not too distant past, something that could be measured or quantified via IQ testing and accomplishments. Nowadays, just being street smart or having a stroke of luck or genius and you’re it–a genius. Think about it–there is being ingenious and that still doesn’t make one a genius. Erap was ingenious in parlaying his masa appeal and showbiz career to capture the presidency; as were basketball players, TV newscasters and movie stars who sought political office. Does that now automatically make them geniuses? Does a successful business empire make one a genius? Yet, we are so ready to confer the term with qualifiers; as in "advertising genius," "marketing genius," "PR genius." Come on, give me a break! Don’t swallow everything that’s fed to you. Know the hidden agenda that may exist, the motives that lie beneath.
Let’s not forget it wasn’t so long ago that universities were falling over one other wanting to be recognized as the institution President Estrada would consider himself an alumnus of. They’d even confer honorary degrees and doctorates to make him forget they kicked him out, or that he never graduated. And now?
Ass-licking is a very refined art here in our country, just as refined as revisionism when wheel-turning time comes around. In our haste to please or hype up someone’s creditable but mundane reality, it’s so easy to throw up the word "genius" and watch it stick!
As for "hero," when I was a child it really meant something to be referred to as a "hero." One had accomplished something really exemplary, saved someone or exhibited superhuman self-sacrifice for the benefit of others. Now, we’re so down on ourselves, we’re ready to confer hero status on just about anyone in the news. To survive a hostage situation, to be submissive and stay alive, does that make one a hero? I don’t have anything against her, but was it merely her being an American that made our government go all-out and treat Gracia Burnham as a heroine? What about all the Filipinos who have been taken hostage and survived? Why were they not given the same kind of attention, conferred hero status? Again, what did she actually do while in captivity that was so "heroic"? I am glad she made it through her ordeal, so don’t get riled up thinking I have no respect for what she went through. What bothers me is how the term "hero" was so glibly used and accepted.
Mind you, we are not alone in doing this. To this day, I don’t understand how Lady Di and Mother Teresa are spoken of with the same reverence and awe. Even Jackie Onassis–she may have been a great woman, a style icon, one plucky lady and all that but for her or Diana to be emblematic as heroines for our times only makes me sad for our times. And isn’t it funny how in death we are so ready to mythologize and raise to heaven some person? Before her untimely death–which, let’s face it–was a road accident waiting to happen (what are you doing speeding in the middle of a city underground thoroughfare? Surely, safety of the passengers supersede avoiding paparazzi) we admired Lady Di and pitied her as well. Sad she had to marry into an empty relationship (but that’s not unique) and she did take the time out to do charity work while enjoying a jet set life; but not many would say she was their idea of a "hero." So you have this very unfortunate fatal accident and why is she suddenly a heroine? Tragic figure, yes; heroine?
Exalting and admiring Mother Teresa I understand, ditto for Florence Nightingale, Gabriela Silang, and Joan of Arc. But let’s be circumspect about what is and who is a true hero for our times; otherwise, as I said, it’s more a reflection of our times and our desperation to find the "extraordinary" than it is the real accomplishments of the person being bestowed the special honor.
And yes, you don’t have to agree with everything I say; but if this slice of wry bread has become food for thought, I’m content.
I love it! At least, Reagan had his years as governor of California and Erap his mayoralty of San Juan. With FPJ, we get a true "lamb in the woods," fueled by his own notions of what grandeur may lie ahead, lip-synching to the overture composed and orchestrated by the members of the Opposition. He may be playing coy for now; waiting for the right "carrot."
Unsolicited advice, but if he is serious, he better put in the time to familiarize himself with national issues, the economy and currency problems, the insurgency thorn in our collective national butt, the peace and order… ahh! Forget it! He and everyone else are hoping all it’ll take is his officially tossing his hat (yes, cowboy) into the political ring and everything will fall into place. That is, until he actually assumes office. Then if my advice goes unheeded, he’ll be dependent on the traditional politicians and technocrats, who do we doubt, all have their own private agendas.
The rebirth of the age of Rasputins, Richelieus and "powers behind the throne" is just around the corner. Isn’t it so-sad-it’s-funny how these Opposition politicians would berate former President Aquino for lacking administrative acumen and hands-on government skills. At best, they’d admit she may have been necessary, the right person at that particular time for this country, but sorely muffed the opportunity because of inexperience. And yet, they’re now rallying behind FPJ. Hmmm! Did I really miss something there? Or did they?
I talk to people who try to understand or are sympathetic to his running and what do I get? He’s clean, he only has one wife, he’s not Erap at all. Whoopee! We are so ready to grasp at straws, Hail to the Cheap! They can’t say with certainty he’s intelligent, they can’t point out a single record of public duty or administrative quality, and they can only quote box-office figures (which by the way have waned over the last few years). Yup, if this is our version of presidential timber, is it any wonder we’re a severely denuded and deforested nation (and yes, denuded does sound very much like deluded from where I’m sitting).
Sometimes I wonder what people like Sen. Ed Angara really feel, knowing that their own plans will in reality only get them so far, and having to accept that someone like FPJ is their best bet. Senator Angara has all these years of public service, has proven to be knowledgeable and adept in handling situations of national impact, has dealt regularly with counterparts from other nations, and the list goes on. For him, is it lip service or true belief that FPJ is the man to lead our country in 2004? If true belief, what then were the years he spent toiling in the back bench and political caucuses all for? The nights cramming on issues and options and alternatives, creating models of agricultural growth, examining foreign and national policy? I give up, you tell me. In the meantime, the FPJ juggernaut just picks up speed.
Here we go again! Instead of having an election based on platform and issues, with two or more individuals of proven public service vying for the post, we’re heading for a popularity contest–the King versus the pseudo-Ate Guy, an incumbent that would use subliminal Nora Aunor references. Malacañang is still Tinseltown… without the tinsel.
BrandSpace Articles
<
>