Yeah, I doubt very seriously that I could cite one song from any composer and say "there it is, that makes him a genius". I don't think people do that with Mozart or Gershwyn...but they're still called geniuses.

I decided to really think about that word for a while and see what it means to me (if anything). OK, who are the folks that are most often called geniuses? Einstein for one, and do any of us actually have a clue why he was so brilliant? And do we really care? Most of us only know the anecdotal stuff (he flunked math and may have had sex with Marilyn Monroe). How about Edison, the Wright Bros. Leonardo and Henry Ford? All seem to be acknowledged as geniuses, but really the thing that links them would appear to be good imaginations, and a work ethic that probably rendered them useless as entertaining human beings. I doubt any of those people would spare five minutes (let alone an hour) of their day to hang out on something like Mudcat and be funny, or informative, or generous.

How about looking at some folks who were called geniuses by later generations? Van Gogh and Schubert come to mind. Both these folks in their own time saw themselves (and were seen by others) as abject failures.

Are there any quite ordinary beings in each of our own lives currently who might in the future be called "genius?" Personally, I can think of two long time friends of mine: Grit Laskin, who has been building world class guitars for twenty five years, has started seeing some of his instruments (and with them his astonishing and ground breaking inlay work) go directly from his shop into museums, rather than into the hands of players. That might be an indication of something to come in the future. It was certainly the case with Stradivarius, and Michaelangelo. In their times they were merely known as great craftsmen. The other person I know is guitarist Tony Quarrington. Simply the most inventive player I've known. A quiet, usually rumpled eccentric who wouldn't have a clue how to toot his own horn. Someone else wuold have to toot it for him..maybe in 50 years they will.

Others who have been called (without too much disention) geniuses: Muhammed Ali, Freud, Bill Gates(!) Ronald Regan(!!) Horowitz, MacArthur, Shakespeare, DeNiro, Michael Jordan, and even James Dean!

It strikes me that perhaps genius may in part be the skill needed in becoming well known...and in some cases the skill of someone else in spreading the word about someone they admire(d) Even fictional characters from the past, who are so admired my great numbers of people can be part of the process..Thousands every year make pilgrimages to Baker St. to "see" Sherlock Holmes. Would not some of the best known (but factually deficient) religious deities fit in there as well?

What do all the above folks have in common? Enough talent, and complete tunnel vision (at least until their main body of work was completed). It may be that the combination of those two factors can be said to be "genius" and that perhaps the rest of us may have either one, but not both.

I feel comfortable putting Bob Dylan's name in that group. His work for the most part was decent, and 40 years after he started, he's still a topic of discussion. Much more so than others of his songwriting generation. As to one song? Well, lots of folks (including many here) can write as well as Dylan...but could we without having heard him first?

Rick