Dear Readers,

You know the drill. Enjoy!

Malcolm Gladwell chronicles the evidence of genius in context to career success in Chapters 3 and 4 of Outliers. Citing the work of psychologist Lewis Terman and detailing the life of Chris Langan, Gladwell uses both as examples of how having super brain power has little to do with sky rocketing success. In each chapter, the conventional idea that superior intellect alone is not enough to determine future success is creatively challenged.

Essentially, only up to a certain point, intellect staves off and doesn’t matter quite as much. As an example, Gladwell compares height in professional basketball (Gladwell really likes sports, doesn’t he?) with the scale of intelligence:

You need to be at least six foot or six one to play at that level, and, all things being equal, it’s probably better to be six two than six one, and better to be six three than six two. But past a certain point, height stops mattering so much.

A player who is six foot eight is not automatically better than someone two inches shorter. (Michael Jordan, the greatest player ever, wa six six after all.)

A basketball player has to be tall enough – and the same is true of intelligence. Intelligence has a threshold.

So, that’s great. One only has to be smart enough, period. I’m ready to cue Stuart Smalley with his famous catch phrase. As mentioned, Gladwell chronicles the life of Chris Langan who’s got super sized brain power – a certified genius. He even did one of those gimmicky TV game shows called 1 vs. 100 (ever heard of it? I haven’t).

Basically wasted talent, Langan only manages to make it through a year and a half of college before dropping out and drifting to…nowhere? How could this happen? How can someone with the IQ of 195 (higher than Einstein’s!) disappear into the fabric of being dully ordinary? If you want the details, read the book.

But, in a nutshell, a series of unfortunate events and missteps made a huge contribution to Chris Lagan’s current state of affairs (well, not really, in my opinion).

In Chapter 4, we delve a little deeper into Langan’s background. An abusive stepfather, disjointed childhood and a fractured home life have all played a role in Langan’s upbringing. Summarily, Gladwell deems Langan’s lack of “practical intelligence”  as a major factor leading to his less than extraordinary success. The chapter cites the work of sociologist Annette Lareau, using her study as comparative set up for Langan and Robert Oppenheimer.

By the way, Oppenheimer tried to poison his tutor – but he was a genius!

In short, Gladwell asserts through Lareau’s findings that children raised with a sense of entitlement are more likely to be successful than those who are not taught to use it (or expect it) no matter how smart they are.

Entitlement is not used negatively in this sense, but instead, conjures ideas of speaking up, asking for special treatment and ”customizing” your environment to fit your particular needs. This is not something you are born to do - you learn to do it (usually from your parents). Now, we can have a good reason to blame our parents for one more thing gone wrong in our lives.

Because Langan lacked this particular skill, he had trouble navigating his way through college, financial aid paperwork and, from it what it seems, life in general.

Chris Langan only had the bleakness of Bozeman [Montana], and a home dominated by an angry, drunken stepfather….That was the the lesson Langan learned from his childhood: distrust authority and be independent….He didn’t learn entitlement. He learned constraint.

It may seem like a small thing, but it was a crippling handicap in navigating the world beyond Bozeman.

This entitlement that Gladwell speaks of sounds like the helicopter parenting that the Me-Generation has been immersed – and the one that everyone complains about. Let’s make up our minds people! Wait, let’s not bother with that.

So, having a sense of entitlement is good now? It’s okay to ask for what you want and expect to get it? Well, thank you Mr. Gladwell. I can get started on my success now. How many duh moments am I going to have with this book? Note the scathing sarcasm.

I don’t believe many twenty somethings have a problem with entitlement. Gladwell does have a point. You may have to be taught to speak up for yourself and to ask for the things you need to get what you want. Entitlement may be learned, but you don’t necessarily need someone else to teach it to you (or help you recognize that you need it).

Negotiating out of tight spots (like Oppenheimer did with the board after trying to poison his teacher) or navigating the clutter of financial aid processes for college comes down to one thing: self-preservation. If Langan wasn’t interested in trying to figure out how to pay for school or figure out other ways to feed his genius, all the entitlement in the world isn’t going to make up for that.

And perhaps, that’s why Gladwell calls it heartbreaking.

But to me, it just seems plain stupid.