Nearly all persons fuss with thoughts of gaining a bit of fame in their lives, in some way to rank above friends or family members. But rank may make the achiever an enemy. To have a famed mother, father, or sibling may spell tragedy to a person who feels put upon by the achievements of others. The standout is made into a competitive figure, therefore to be resisted, perhaps disliked. The context may not even relate to greatness, but celebrity status, perceived or real, small or large. To the immature mind greatness and celebrity may meld together, creating strange circumstances. The reputation of greatness in history distorts human values. In classes we heard about Alexander the Great, about Herod the Great, about Catherine the Great, and the list lengthened with synonyms for honors, such as Richard, the Lion Hearted, and the Genius Einstein. We read of the greatness of certain literati, musicians, and artists, like Mozart, DaVinci, and Michelangelo. These included inventors, scientists, industrialists, navigators, saints and others who may humble the common masses. Secular sources commonly gave somewhat different emphasis to the god focused persons like the Pauls, the Augustines, the Luthers, and the Mother Teresas.
Greatness continues to drive us to psychological distortions. Persons identified as great because of their secular achievements, were often ugly or unformed in character, in arrogance, in excesses of conspicuous consumption, of drugs and alcohol, of sex, and disregard for virtue in persons or general society. One follows the sorrows of the sons of David in the Old Testament, who yearned to possess the greatness of their father’s kingship. James Joyce, Eugene O’Neill, Ernest Hemingway, and other writers were permitted appalling behavior, revealing unfinished world views and meaning, because they were effective wordsmiths. Kings and princes, actors and scientists, generals and moguls, defend themselves in their achievements – often non-sequiturs for the best purposes of life. Gauguin, the gifted painter, ended his days early in life chronology, on an island, a Marquesas paradise, to which he escaped with his pornography. He died two years later, blind and syphilitic, with open body sores. Does humanism accept and create such context?
The stories emerge, from the past and the present. Erupting Vesuvius sealed a record of Pompeii excesses of a number of wealthy Roman citizens, 2000 years ago. Some analysts argue that much of current culture – sensuality, various excesses, degraded entertainments, decline in values including language usage, recklessness related to the needs of others, and the like – are greater than they were in declining Rome. In 2003 a news program noted that: Playboy is main stream. Hugh Hefner was reported as a cultural liberator on the 50th anniversary of his pornographic magazine. One claimed he changed the world. Critics contend that if degradation ended an advanced Roman society, in Pompeii-like events and a lengthy moral decline, that America is due for judgment because, as one reporter wrote: American culture is more depraved than that of the Roman Empire. We need to evaluate in truth and voice what is happening in general society. We need to define greatness so as to include social virtue. Until we do, we continually risk confusion of greatness and celebrity. There is concern that even careful analysts are unsure about what is a good culture. Moral and modeling values belong to a truly good society. The church offers several magnificent contenders for interesting, constructive, cohesive, artistic, model, and caring culture, but the public attention is taken with a shifting pop culture. Our performance in life is meant to draw virtue, truth and beauty from and to the human race. We need summaries from modern analysts extolling values in their interpretations of culture. *Mark W. Lee, Sr. — 2016, 2020