Some say they don't want to be the heavy metal head, or the hip hop head or listen to jazz exclusively; they want to be the diverse listeners of all genres. They don't want to be the person that is an expert in Italian cuisine yet knows nothing of all the others. They don't want to wear the same style everyday, but rather remain fashionably diverse all the time. They want to be above average in almost everything they are or do, yet not masters of just one. They think being too supreme in on thing sets you apart - and not always in a good way. Ideally, they think, they want to be the best of who is 'in', not a unique 'out'. Excel to be special, yet not too special. Able and good enough to be distinguished, but not so much so that they miss the field entirely.
Others argue differently, they want to be a great genius in one thing only and average or below average in everything else. They say 'who said greatness in one thing is wrong?' Most great historical and current figures are actually known for that one thing.'
Being great in one thing will take away from being good in many other things. Time and energy are limited. How do you wish to spend them?
How much time does greatness require and does it leave ample space for exceling in other things? Can you be great in many things? Is there always a sacrifice?
Comments