Unnovation
n. – the opposite of innovation.
Yah, I made up a word: sue me. Actually, don’t sue me. I can’t afford that right now. Between preparing to move out of the country and writing chapter 4 of my thesis—a job I do for very little pay—I’m not in any position for an out-of-court settlement.
More to the point though. I caught the following quote this morning, and this was the word that came into my brain.
It’s not the genius who is 100 years ahead of his time but average man who is 100 years behind it. -Robert Musil, novelist (1880-1942)
It is absolutely true, by the way and it reminded me of a discussion that I had with my dad after my last post regarding the state of innovation in our current economic and social climate.
What we decided was that the best thing for a struggling economy/company/city is to let it fail, unless it is willing to change.
Case in point: General Motors. Old, good company. Makes cars. Could be substituted with any of the other major American automotive companies. They haven’t really committed any serious innovation in the past century. Cars are, with many bells and whistles aside, primarily the same as they were 100 years ago. They still operate under the same principles, for the most part, and the end result is the same. If you disagree with this, then you haven’t looked under the hood of any car. I would suggest then that you find a Model-A and dismantle it. Then, find a late model Mustang and dismantle it. Put both of the back together. You’ll see what I am talking about.
Now, there are some companies which have committed innovation. Any company that is putting a solar panel on the top of a car to give extra power for the air-con—Toyota—is innovative in this climate. Running cars on hydrogen fuel cells, hybrids, electrics, and plug-in models are all innovative.
General Motors—our present case-study—has done none of these things. And I don’t want to hear that GM has the Volt, an electric concept car. It is too late for concept cars. Please move to the back of the line.
Back to the crux of this line of argumentation: GM has made no major innovations of late, possibly ever, and yet they and their investors are worried and scrambling to figure out/fix their current financial problem. However, nothing they do will make any difference.
They already have the only solution to their problems, but it is just a concept car. They could save the company and generate a huge amount of business if they were just to release that car, and all problems along with it. It wouldn’t be for everyone, of course. At first it would only be for the brave who don’t mind being late because their battery died or something. It would be for those who are willing to test and try and see how it works. The deal that would have to come along with it, of course, is that the dealers would have to service anything that went wrong with the car free-of-charge and immediately. Throw in 24-hour tow-from-anywhere-and-take-you-home service: brilliant.
The only other thing to do now is to simply let it die, which is more likely. Maybe the market fallout from that will take the other big two with it. We can only hope.
I know, I’m a horrible bastard for wishing such fates on American companies. “Do [I] know what effect that would have on so many Americans’ lives?” Yes, I do. But, do you know what else would happen? Some genius young engineer, right in line with his time, will be able to step up and do something brilliant. This time, though, he won’t have the added innovative hurdle of having to either out-shout the “Big Three” or be subsumed into them and destroyed by their contrary interests. Jobs and economic development to follow.
We haven’t seen a Thomas Edison, Alexander Graham Bell, George Washington Carver, or any of their ilk in such a long time that we wouldn’t know an innovator if they punched us in the face. Maybe it is time for some knock-outs, but they won’t come until the big, stupid brutes die off to make way for the skinny, malnourished geniuses.
———
1 This idea was lifted directly from a phone conversation with my dad yesterday. Dad: it’s a great idea.
1
All three of those innovators you just mentioned were home schooled. The home school movement is alive and growing every year. It started becoming more prevalent in the 1980s, and we are just now seeing the adults of those early years becoming functional members of society. In another 20 years there is going to be an *influx* of home schooled geniuses into all segments of our society; that’s pretty exciting! Here’s a link to an article about the genius of home schooling:
http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=16300
And an exhaustive list of famous home schoolers:
http://www.knowledgehouse.info/famous.html
(I’m not affiliated in any way with either of those sources, just a home schooling mom working on churning out my own geniuses.)
2
There was a time when home-schooling was the norm, or at least when education was a great deal less formal than it is today. I have always felt that this regimented, teach-to-test horror that we call education today cannot possibly be doing anything good for students. It certainly creates a contempt for learning and for being intelligent and inquisitive on the part of students.
I have noticed, when teaching college classes, that some of my best students are those who identify themselves as being home-schooled or having gone to a charter school.
Cheers to you for making that leap.
3
Leave your new word at http://pseudodictionary.com, that’s what it’s for