I’m tempted to say smart, creative people
have no particularly different set of character traits than the rest of us except for being
smart and creative, and those being character traits. Then, on the other hand, I wrote a
biography of Richard Feynman and a biography of Isaac Newton. Now, there are two great
scientific geniuses whose characters were in some superficial ways completely different.
Isaac Newton was solitary, antisocial, I think unpleasant, bitter, fought with his friends
as much as with his enemies. Richard Feynman was gregarious, funny, a great dancer, loved
women. Isaac Newton, I believe, never had sex. Richard Feynman, I believe, had plenty.
So you can’t generalize there. On the other hand, they were both, as I tried
to get in their heads, understand their minds, the nature of their genius, I sort of felt
I was seeing things that they had in common, and they were things that had to do with aloneness.
Newton was much more obviously alone than Feynman, but Feynman didn’t particularly work
well with others. He was known as a great teacher, but he wasn’t a great teacher, I
don’t think, one on one. I think he was a great lecturer. I think he was a great communicator.
But when it came time to make the great discoveries of science, he was alone in his head. Now,
when I say he, I mean both Feynman and Newton, and this applies, also, I think, to the geniuses
that I write about in The Information, Charles Babbage, Alan Turing, Ada Byron. They all
had the ability to concentrate with a sort of intensity that is hard for mortals like
me to grasp, a kind of passion for abstraction that doesn’t lend itself to easy communication,
I don’t think.