At some point my old man said to me, «I’m going to save you a lot of frustration, you’re a long way from being a genius or something, so get it out of your head that your grades indicate something like that.” Around the same time, and after an intense discussion that I barely managed to sustain, he ended up telling me that «What you know is little, but you know it well». So, in a few months I ended up convinced of the lack of conviction, sure in my insecurity, and with the court painted as accurately as possible, although Ripley does not believe it.
You see, knowing that I’m not a genius enables me to treat myself as a guy with normal abilities and then gives me the freedom to compare myself to any guy or broad who, like me, enjoys and suffers from normal abilities. That is, if I, being normal, can do this or that thing and you can’t, you are the one who is going as an idiot. Of course, then came the differentiated intelligences and all that bullshit, I know, but the bottom line is the same. There are those who play Opus 35, and those who don’t, and you don’t need to be a genius to do it. Let’s be clear about this.
Then, beyond Socrates’ resounding logic, knowing it well does have its flavour. Because, you change the scope and put an «I know few women, but the few I know I know well», what a beau you look like, huh? Now, the point is that that little bit is broad, to fuck it up, I mean. «I know few animals». . . . That is, going back to the bank, getting involved with 5 taxi drivers I have the problem of all the taxi drivers and I can establish a daily credit system for them. If you’ve seen one street kid, have you seen them all?
So, like you, I am not a genius and, like you, I know few things and some of them I know well. I can record the gestures that follow actions and record them as a background. But, like you, just like you, I have the special touch, which makes me and makes me and you unique and confirms us: the ability to do without. Look around you, and you will see that the most learned of the learned of the letters usually did nothing more than a cult of lack that always forged them.
You and I, without being geniuses, accept that what abounds is need, and that is why it costs so little, since we are economists. To need is the common, the vulgar – not the ordinary – and to do without, then, is the rare, the exquisite. As I hope you sense now, exclusiveness is only a natural state of evolution. The diamond does not despise graphite, but both choose who will show them off, and only one of many is able to tuck in with both without waiting for the common people to notice. For example, do you often read paragraphs of 101 words each?