While watching House: Teamwork Season 6 : Ep. 7 on Hulu last night, I got to thinking about Watson, Holmes' loveable but less than brilliant sidekick. In "Teamwork," Dr. House desperately goes about reconstructing his team of doctors. These doctors support Dr. House in solving complex medical cases that have stumped other medical professionals; however, they are not Dr. House's equal: they are Watsons, at worst simply witnesses to a great mind at work and at best collaborators who provide false leads that ignite Dr. House's genius.The question the doctors, the Watsons raised in my mind is thus: is the genius-mind dependent upon the common-mind for more than simply the relational dichotomy of Good & Evil or Truth & fallacy? Could it be that in English and American literature (and popular culture) that the common-mind provides the spark that drives the genius-mind? Alternatively, is it that the common-mind seeks out the genius-mind in order to improve or seek approval, while the genius-mind must constantly find ways to prove its genius to itself by "one-upping" the common-mind?
Dr. Wilson, Dr. House's best friend, questions Dr. House's motives for reconstructing his old team (when those old team members were obviously not interested) when there are thousands of medical practitioners who would jump at the opportunity to work alongside Dr. House and gain experience in the field of Diagnostic Medicine. Dr. Wilson's question and straightforward assessment made me pause, as did Dr. House's response. Dr. House wished to keep the doctors, the Watsons with whom he is familiar, better to work with the minds he knows than those he doesn’t.
What flummoxed me was how a genius-mind like Dr. House needed his team of Watsons. If genius-minds are just common-minds, in that in order to self-actualize, it must first travel Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, Dr. House was seeking to reconstruct his team so that he could manufacture the conditions that provide his genius the strongest spark. When his team was reassembled, at the end of the episode, Dr. House gloats to Dr. Wilson that he has done it: Dr. House's team is complete. This means to me that Dr. House has found his proverbial happy-place and achieved something that even Dr. Wilson can never hope to accomplish: self-actualization.
What Dr. House doesn't know is that he is confessing to Dr. Wilson that he is incapable of achieving his full potential, genius-mind, his self-actualization without the aid of his common-mind Watsons. Dr. House is dependent; the genius-mind is dependent upon the common-mind. This gives me great hope, but is also very sad: the genius-mind feeds on common-minds, and it seems that as our literary tradition ages and evolves the genius-mind requires an increasing number of common-minds to function.
Holmes needed but one Watson, while Dr. House needs four common-minds to keep the deductive spark alive.
What I’m not sure of is how to feel about the role of the common-mind, of the Watsons who support the genius-mind by providing false leads or incorrect diagnoses that challenge the genius-mind to propose alternatives to the collective common-mind’s wisdom. When I say “feel,” I mean that in a system or team, Dr. House and his doctors or Holmes and Watson, the genius-mind is to admired and aspired to as the common-mind is devalued and demeaned. However, if the genius-mind needs common-minds in order to function, then both the genius and common-minds have relational value. So, then why is it that both Dr. House and Holmes dismiss and belittle the common-mind that supports their genius?
I believe that the answer to that question lies within constrains of communication and language. The ability to communicate relies on language use. If a common-mind and the genius-mind do not share a foundation or shared technical language, the barrier to precise communication will foster resentment. For example, the genius-mind will seek to use the most precise descriptive word or phrase (Class:…), which is shorthand for an entire system of smaller ideas; while the common-mind will need to have the term unpacked which takes time. Alternately, the common-mind will, instead of using one word to represent an entire system will need to explain that system out (…a system of “haves” and “have-nots” that fosters desire, fear, and resentment between those that “have and those who “want”).
When language disrupts communication in the relationship of genius and common-minds, the common-mind will have feelings of inadequacy that will turn into resentment or awe of the genius-mind. Either way, the common-mind’s feelings of inadequacy will generate conflict. Meanwhile, the genius-mind becomes increasingly frustrated that not only does the genius-mind need the common-mind, but that it must constantly pander or dumb down its language use to ease tension and to accomplish its ultimate goal – the maintenance of the exact conditions in which its genius can flourish.
0 comments:
Post a Comment