Einstein vs Picasso

Lately I have been fretting a lot over the uncoolness of science and math. The earliest sign of this problem (to my late waking eyes) was when I was in a conversation about types of elementary schools, the ability to focus on a given task for long periods of time and learning to act within a structured framework (as against more free-form schooling). I was surprised how many people thought that elementary school was too early to introduce structure to children and that by doing so, we would compromise their curiosity, their budding artist, their creative bent. I would be killing their inner Picasso. Fair enough. "But what about their inner Einstein?", I thought to myself. Why is it good parenting to kill Albert for Pablo but not Pablo for Albert? Why is it superior to raise a child in an environment with such a huge gap to inevitable one hour lectures, prerequisites, labs, and yes, structure?

From that moment on, my distress has been secretly and viciously growing by the day.

It is hip to say "I was never good at math". They laugh about the futility of algebra but they won't use a simple 2*pi*r to calculate how much chicken wire they need to go around their 18" diameter pot. Growing up, science wasn't uncool - it was sought after. You wanted to say how good your knowledge of quantum physics or organic chemistry or mechanics was. You wanted to be the go-to person for math. While the "cool kids" weren't necessarily all future scientists, some certainly were. So it is incomprehensible to me that science is unhip now.

Me - I'm on team Einstein. If RoRo is truly an artist or a musical wonder, it will show, but he won't be any more or less cool to me because of it. His inner Einstein can coexist with his inner Picasso, because I'm not beyond finger painting his math.

Everything looks better in acrylic
by the artist formerly known as Nary.

(Yes, now this blog will go back to being entertainment again)