My essay is about this: “The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, not by their contemporaries”
The author asserts that in order to evaluate individuals’ greatness, we should refer to the persons who live after them, rather than comparing them with their contemporaries. This claim seems to be true when a person’s talents and abilities are not recognized by his people. This may occur in some cases, which is mentioned in what follows.
First, consider a case when a person’s level in his field is much higher than the intellect of his contemporary people. If so, people can not perceive the value of this person, and they may throw down the person from the society. Nima Yushij, a Persian poet, who lived in 20th century is a good case. Nima rebelled against the classical type of poetry and introduced a new type. The conservative literati, who lived in Nima’s age disagreed with the new type and considered it as a disdainful invention. Unfortunately, Nima encountered harsh criticism from them and eventually, he preferred to live and work in solitude. Nevertheless, ten years after Nima’s death, the poets recognized the value of the poetry type introduced by Nima Yushij. They named this type “Sher-e-No” or “New Poetry”. Consequently, Nima’s greatness could be perceived, only by the people who lived after him, because Nima’s genius in inventing a new poetry style contradicted the common beliefs of his conservative contemporaries.
Second, if a person is an iconoclast, his points of view may remain unrecognized in his age. For example, almost all of the ordinary people in every period of time, don’t tolerate a person who does not agree with their accepted beliefs. Sometimes, the iconoclast promulgates the right attitude, but people prefer to insist on their wrong attitudes which is inherited from their antecedents. In this case, people who live after the iconoclastic person would judge better about the controversial issue. For another example, if an individual has opposite attitudes with the government, he may be restricted and traduced, both by the authorities and the majority who supports the government. In this case, the person’s attitudes may remain unknown for many years until a new government comes, who formalizes his attitudes.
However, if a person is not be included in the two above mentioned categories, it is more appropriate to judge his value in comparing with his contemporaries; because individuals who live in a same age have the most similar conditions. The most important similarity is that they have equal access to remnants of the antecedents.
Yes I know your vacation was not good, because you said that “ouch, I feel guilty now for going on vacation - I leave nothing but desolation in my path!”
So I wish it had been better
Thanks a lot for your correction