• Welcome to BookAndReader!

    We LOVE books and hope you'll join us in sharing your favorites and experiences along with your love of reading with our community. Registering for our site is free and easy, just CLICK HERE!

    Already a member and forgot your password? Click here.

Artistic or Intelligent?

I think I would have to lean towards having an intelligent child. Are we to assume that these children will not only posess these abilities but be interested in pursuing them to their fullest capabilities? I have no children yet, but I would just love a truly intelligent child. One who could really think and pursue any degree and go to any school. They could have a wide range of options there. A sporty, singing, or athletic child: wouldn't they just be pigeonholed into one area? How long would this athletic ability last before they aged or got injured? :confused: Well, I suppose it has it perks but I think I would enjoy a clever child more

Though, growing up with my brother and being a nanny for one particular little girl has taught me that the smarter the child, the more difficult they can be. A very bright child would fit in with my family better. My father and brother are both highly intelligent, and I remember always being jealous of my brother for being so smart. Although I was a very clever child, made good grades, and was generally always ahead of the rest of my class I couldn't get anywhere NEAR where my brother was. :rolleyes: You just can't compete with an IQ like that.
 
I'd much prefer an intelligent child. I don't think I'll ever worry if I can draw better than my kid does, and she certainly isn't going to get any other type of artistic talent from me. However, I just can't deal with people who are unable to string together an intelligent paragraph after years of schooling. Besides, lacking artistic talent doesn't mean my kid can't still be creative.
 
Motokid said:
Sergo, I used to play in a band in my younger days. We had a girl singer who on a regular basis could make the hairs on the back of my neck stand up with her power, grace, range, and ability to sing certain songs. I've had the same experiences with some guitar players and other musicians.

I've never looked at a sculpture or painting and had the same experience. It's all a matter of personal taste I'm sure.

I would never say singing is less of an art than painting, or sculpting, or instrument playing, or acting, or dancing. Even with beyond natural talents there's still lots of very hard work that must go into refining talent.
Click to expand...

Yep, Moto, I see what you mean. And maybe I am somewhat happier, as the hairs on the back of my neck can stand up in response to my seeng a sculpture of, say, Rhoden or Michelangelo, or a painting of some of our Russian artists of the last quarter of the last century.

As to your question... You know, if we speak about everyday life, both thinker-genius and artist-genius would almost surely have problems assotiating with other people, and other problems due to differences between their advanced understanding of life and that of ordinary people. But I think for the artistic genius, especially one who is working with his/her hands rather than vocal cords, it would be easier to solve those problems at least for him/herself, as real hard hand labour could more often give a sense of satisfaction, than just thinking. So I would have imagined that life of an artistic genius would be more... perfect? satisfactory?
And if we speak not of genius-qualities, but just of shares of thinker-qualities vs artistic-qualities, common in ordinary people, I am surely for thinker qualities, as these are what one needs in everyday life, from childhood till deathbed.
 
Motokid said:
...
If you could program your next child's talents and abilities but you had to chose between having the scales of those talents falling more towards the artisitic, or the intellectual side of the spectrum, which would you chose?

No wussing out here either...you can't say you would prefer a balanced mix between the two. If the choice was above average intelligence, or above average ability to do something artisitic which would you chose for your child?

Straight A's and honor roll, or the star of the school's performances in some field of the arts?
Click to expand...


For the boy, I would choose music (composing, to be specific), or sculpture or painting. For the girl, science, psychology or astronomy. In whichever the area, he/she must be an imncomparable genius to overthrow the ruling predecessors. :mad:
 
I know Moto wants to keep it simple, but Sergo brings an excellent point. Very many successful, happy people are great communicators and negotiators, but neither of these choices guarantees that option. Artistic genius and 'intellectual' genius (by which I guess you mean math/science, or do you mean everything outside praciticing art? BTW, great mathematical minds are often very good musicians) often comes with an intolerance and disinterest in things outside your field. Do we wish that on any child?

Also, just for the record, Yale has a most excellent theater program and stellar music department, with an illustrious alumni/ae list.
 
I've seen too many perfect score SAT kids. I know who kid who will be attending MIT and major in engineering. He goes to college campuses during summers and ranks in single digits in competitions against other kids interested in engineering. You know what?, he has the personality and social skills of a doorknob-give me the talented kid in the arts or even athletics(gasp!) any day.
 
You bring up an interesting topic, sfg. I recently saw a news program where they updated several stories they did on child-prodigies, you know, like a kid who got his first college degree at ten years old. I distinctly remember one boy, who is now, at the ripe old age of 21, a college professor. And he has a great personality, and do you know why? While his parents had to push for him to be able to go to high school and college at an unbelievably young age, they also let him play soccer and all that kid stuff. He was allowed to mature both mentally and socially with his mental and social peers, even though they were not one and the same.
 
I would have to plump for intelligence over artistic ability I'm afraid, which is a shame, because intelligence or cognitive ability alone won't make for a good, say, Scientist....
What's the point of achieving in Science if you can't appreciate what has been achieved?
 
Hmmm interesting topic.

I would go for the one that scars my children the least.

If we are talking slightly above average, I would go for intellect. Above average intellect can take you far in the world, were as above average artistic talents can lead to only ever being almost good enough. The poor kid would work himself to the bone and always find someone more talented doing it better.

If were talking true genius kids, you know one in a million, exceptional, I would go the other way. An genius artist can be famous and successful, probably tortured by his/her art, but able to accomplish great things and still be accepted by society.

A genius thinker on the other hand has it very tough I think. They get isolated from a young age, have a very difficult time relating to other people. Even on their own level, they tend to have more competitors than friends. It tends to be a very lonely existence.


I have seen a little of this in University, I studied Engineering and the bright students were by and large much better off than the real geniuses. The truly genius level guys were withdrawn and struggled to make friends or interact at all with other people.

My girlfriend on the other hand studied Drama, and there you had to be truly gifted to be able to actually make a living. Being good didn't cut it, and a lot of the guys who studied it broke down when they realised they would probably not stand amongst the minority of actors who 'make it' in the industry.

Mmmm the engineers tended to be anti-social and depressive, while the arts guys had massive emotional break downs. I think that being normal (or as close to it as possible) is the way to go.
 
I dont think that you can be artistic on a high level without having very high intellectuel skills. Many of the great genius in the world, both in science and in art, have developed ways of understanding, viewing the world, viewing challenges in a way outside the norm. Think of Einstein, Rodin and Picasso.

What it really boils down to in both areas is whether the person can act on their knowledge and skills. Even talented people have to work hard.

Flower
 
artistic

i would rather have my child be able to express his/her self freely any way they see fit than be teased as an egghead and subsequently become reserved and bottled up
 
Having been disallowed to pursue anything that might appear "artsy", and having not picked up a guitar until I was well over 30, I would have to say "art" over "Intelligence".

Given an unbound choice, though, I would chose ambition over either of these.

I really don't think that talent or intelligence have very much at all to do with success. Look at all of the successful writers out there who just pound out piles of inanity and make a good living at it. They are succeeding in their field with mediocre talent. Drive and ambition are much more important than talent or intelligence.

But, I would still choose talent.
 
leckert said:
Given an unbound choice, though, I would chose ambition over either of these.

I really don't think that talent or intelligence have very much at all to do with success. Look at all of the successful writers out there who just pound out piles of inanity and make a good living at it. They are succeeding in their field with mediocre talent. Drive and ambition are much more important than talent or intelligence.
Click to expand...
You are absolutely right. Hard work and the desire to succeed will get a person much farther in life than artistic ability or high intelligence alone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top