Jocks vs. nerds, brawn vs. brain, hunks vs. dweebs; America has a conflicted relationship with the smart, studious, or anyone wh
o has not taken the hunter-gatherer macho path. As David Anderegg notes in Nerds: Who They Are and Why We Need More of Them, there’s a divide in our culture between “Men of Action” and “Men of Reflection.” Superman embodies the polar extremes. Clark Kent represents the private, introverted, nerdy side, but it’s the public, muscle-bound he-man from Krypton that our culture celebrates. Our society purportedly encourages high achievement in math and science. But it also crucifies brains for being smart. Yes, we do want our kids to do well in school – just as long as the passions they relish, the knowledge they acquire, and the pursuits they master have relevance to the real world. In other words, being an astrophysicist better make them a bunch of money. Too smart, you’re declared a freak, thus ostracized, and picked last for the kickball team at recess. It’s a mixed message. This passage emphasizes what about America’s treatment of “smart” people?
A) Being “smart” is important, as long as a person is not too “smart.”
B) They are seen as useful and necessary contributors to society.
