Do you think it’s better to be a recognised expert for one thing, or known to be really good at lots of things?
You know, I have always believed that being really good at a lot of things was the way to go.
However, from a very young age, I have always been aware that people who are an expert at one thing are somehow quite content with that.
And not only content, but have almost found their way in life. It has made their life easier by being an expert at a single thing, instead of being alright at everything and being confused as anything when it came to making to choices.
Especially in England, where you must make a choice for every major step in your education, it was easier for experts. Simple, almost. Because they knew exactly what they wanted. They knew what they were passionate in. And they didn’t have to sacrifice or regret any choices because their option was so much easier for them. Made from the birth passion.
But, at the same time, I can really appreciate the beauty of being really good at a few things. You end up knowing a lot about seemingly unrelated things, and it is a gift. The ability to talk about it all and remember and experience all these things your just “good” at, you know.
And plus, always being known to be good at one thing has its drawbacks. When you have a reputation of being a master of one thing, no one seems to recognise your other achievements. No matter how wonderful or astounding they are. Say, imagine if Einstein was more than just a really good physicist. Perhaps he was an amazing actor. But we’ll never fully know because this potential career could have been overshadowed by being an expert at physics.
I don’t know. That’s what I think. It’s better to be good at a lot of little things than to be an expert at one big thing. You get the flexibility in reputation and the ability to talk about many things.
But that’s just me.
Nakedstreetkid out x