Forgive genius or paranoia?
I watched this movie because I needed to do an in-depth research report on Apple during my internship, and I searched for this movie with the mentality that I must establish a relationship with my work object. In the end, the relationship was not established, but it allowed me to More to plunge into this job with a cold and hard line.
The movie was watched in two days. On the first day, I watched the release of 1984 MAC. It might be the performance of the actors or some other setting that has a sense of substitution. There are only two words that make my heart swell: scumbag. And knowing that the whole film was watched the next day, these two words were not diluted much.
The whole viewing experience is actually not very good. There is an inexplicable thing similar to anger operating part of the emotions, so I can't fully accept the divine creation and greatness of this person in work. And there is another source of this anger, which is that the film tries to have a tendency to beautify and whitewash, so that the story can be completed into a good story in the secular sense. From Jobs' self-reporting of his family of origin, to the change in his attitude towards Lisa after being "persuaded", and undoubtedly, the audience bought it, which makes me feel that the world spares no effort to beautify the genius. The role of the accomplice.
"Are geniuses or successful people really easily forgiven?" I asked my roommate. Ironic tone.
"No, it's the paranoid that is more easily forgiven." The response I got was crisp and calm.
I felt like I was catching a glimpse of something.
Genius and successful people are a measure of social value, if they are more forgiven, then show a social value, a sense of ability and money worship, a kind of arrogance that acknowledges what I admit and ignores the other's arrogance and arrogance Attitude.
But what if the subject becomes paranoid? Has something changed subtly, it seems, such an object has become easier to forgive.
Because we don't take them as human beings, or we don't take them as people who have the same three views as us. To put it more nasty is to put the other party into the category of "mental disorder/illness" that needs sympathy. .
Shall we chastise a lunatic for God's sake? A high-spirited and compassionate tone.
Suddenly, I had a lot more humane concern for Jobs, and the resentment that had risen in my internal organs disappeared in an instant, and I even began to find various reasons for his behavior: I couldn’t accept my tolerance and kindness because there were too many compromises in interpersonal relationships. There is a conflict with the paranoid perfectionism of the character, and there is only one choice; it is not acceptable that Lisa agrees to sell the house because of a morbid desire for control and so on.
I am satisfied and intend to close the page.
Suddenly the progress bar slipped to a place in the first half of the movie——
Standing in the audience, Steve Wozniacki said: "You're not an engineer, you can't read code, and you're not a designer, what exactly did you do?", and Steve Jobs replied: "I am A conductor, if you're a professional, your seat is there, you're the best musician possible, and I'm conducting the whole movement."
In the obscure light and shadow, I think what qualifications do I have to arrogantly try to pity the other party, try to disassemble the other party's motives, try to give an evaluation, whether it is imperfect, let it exist, no need to rationalize, no need to forgive, no need to reconciliation. To exist is to let it exist.
Am I using the word imperfect?
Why is Steve Jobs pursuing perfection being called imperfect by me, such a trivial person?
And what is the standard I give this evaluation? Why is this standard? perhaps,
Judging Jobs' imperfection with social values and standards is the greatest imperfection. It is not geniuses or paranoia who need to be forgiven, but ourselves.
�
View more about Steve Jobs reviews
