Pseudo-ku : the curse of the 'intellectual'

I was interested to note in a recent Harvard Biz Review article, that it’s been proven that those with very high IQ, are strongly disposed to lack EQ (emotional intelligence – ie ability to be socially and emotionally aware) - and thus need different management techniques. Basically, it was telling us how to lead nerds. And to be brutally honest, there does seem to be a very high frequency of nerds in Asia. I am not sure why this is (OK I suspect it has a lot to do with developing economies, cultures with strong parental controls etc). But that strange, small species of (usually) males who we thought were peculiar, dull and one-dimensional as we cavorted and experimented aged 18 at Uni in the UK, are just ‘regular guys’ in Asia. And there’s a strong chance that the ones at Uni might have actually been from Asia too..  Low EQ is not very popular at University, or with girls – though a very high IQ might be valued in some industries later on, regardless of social skills. Hence the management advice.  

What does seem to be thankfully lacking in Asia however, (or at least in Singapore and Malaysia, where I have lived so far) is the pseudo-intellectual. People over here in Asia more commonly train in ‘useful’, traditional science subjects like engineering. And the popularity of things like art history or philosophy are just not the thing. Yet. And while science-y subjects can attract/breed nerdy, not-great-socially types, the pseudo-intellectual (or simply ‘pseud’) is another kind of social ineptitude which goes with beard-scratching* arts and humanities subjects. (I know this; I went to art school and architecture school, then spent 10 years working in contemporary art!)  

The pseud is the person – usually under 24 years old – who will ambush you at a party and bore you senseless as they launch into a diatribe about Heidegger, Kerouac, the ‘meaning behind their work’ (if they’re an artist) or try to compete with you about conceptual thought or analysis in film/philosophy/literature etc etc. Even if you’re in the middle of enjoying a shandy, and have not expressed the slightest interest in their views on Heidegger or any of the aforementioned.  The subtext from the pseud is often that they're slightly intellectually superior to you (and thus impressive and more cool) if you don’t spar, are not interested in sparring or don’t know who Heidegger is. The real subtext is that they’re immature and lacking in EQ. What might have a place in a crit** or seminar discussion in class, is not necessarily appropriate at a BBQ, or to chat up a date. And that insensitivity stands, regardless of whether you’re boring someone with physics or philosophy. (The difference with the pseud is that unlike the nerd, he/she might not also have a high IQ.) 

Artist pseuds - and this happened A LOT among the amateurs at art school - might go a stage further and actually commit ‘shocking and attention seeking acts’ in order to showcase their intellectual superiority. That ancient adage that notoriety will bring you real fame or respect. I think this is vaguely catching on with some artists in Asia now, actually! *sigh* (Incidentally, the really successful living artists are generally shrewd marketers and business people, not simple attention-seekers, although they might brand themselves that way.) 

Anyway, thankfully, once you're out of college years in the West, pseud numbers start to dwindle rapidly. And given the choice today between a nerd and a pseud, I might well opt for the nerd... or hurling myself into the BBQ pit. In the interim am very happy that the pseudo-intellectual is not yet omnipresent in Asia.

*Beard-scratching, or beard-stroking, is a mocking term referring to the actual act of scratching a (usually goatee) beard, by a pseud, while in ‘deep and meaningful’ thought. 

**A crit is part of art and architecture school training – where you stand up, present and justify your work to a panel of tutors.