Take as a point of contrast, Vincent Van Gogh, who died penniless despite his great talent.  He had a limited circle of friends, if any, and is remembered for the grotesque “gift” of his severed ear to the fellow artist, Paul Gauguin, as a result of a personal dispute.  In short, Van Gogh repelled others from him, whereas Picasso’s charisma drew hordes around him.

Picasso at 5’3” was not a man of stature but he was loved by numerous women whom he took as lovers.  He was always the center of attention in any social circle and was able to charm and endear himself to those who mattered.  He produced over 13,000 paintings and drawings and over 300 sculptures, making him the most prolific artist ever, especially compared to Van Gogh’s more paltry sum of 900 paintings during his lifetime.

What made Picasso successful was the combination of a different perception, lack of fear, but also his ability for social integration.  He was able to convince others that his vision was true in an effortless and remarkable way.  This is the third trait of the iconoclast.

The book is rich in discussion of the complex neurobiology that creates the platform upon which one can become uniquely different and excel beyond others’ expectations.  I think that these short tales of individual iconoclasts can help shape a budding iconoclast by pointing out the basic steps to achieve a different vision that ultimately can lead to a different world.

Ford then heard of a discovery in France of steel that contained a secret ingredient, vanadium, that made steel three times stronger.  Accordingly, he could make his car three times lighter and the same engine would become significantly more powerful.  Having reinvested the profits from the Model A, Ford created the now famous Model T that sold in the first year over 10,000 units and went on to become a blockbuster, eclipsing all other manufacturers.

Ford declared:  “One who fears the future, who fears failure, limits his activities.  Failure is only the opportunity more intelligently to begin again.  There is no disgrace in honest failure; there is disgrace in fearing to fail.”

Ford overcame the prevailing doctrine that steam engines were the way to go for heavy-duty machinery.  He then overcame the idea that electricity would be the future.  It took a creative mind that did not fear failure to see that a double cylinder engine combined with the French steel vanadium would create the magical ingredients of success.

We too often fear ridicule, failure, or risk because we are hindered by our own sense of inadequacy or what others will think of us.  Ford had no such limitations in vision.  He did what he did without external reference to others’ approbation or perception of him.  The next step for the iconoclast is to overcome the innate fear that one possesses about social or professional judgment and failure.

Many of the soldiers were dying of typhoid and cholera, and the thought prevailed at the time that malnourishment made these men more susceptible to that outcome.  Obviously, this logic may have accounted for part of the story but something else was missing.  When the sewers that ran through the barracks were cleaned, the death rate dropped remarkably.  It took Nightingale to see the connection of disease with causative hygiene issues, and it took her to announce this finding for the changes to occur.

This may not seem like a big deal in today’s world but back then nurses and women were considered of a lower social and professional status.  Nightingale altered the perception because she was in the barracks and saw the world differently than the generals did who lived in the scarred terrain of the battlefield.  Nightingale showed imagination and bravery to challenge conventional knowledge of what was causing the soldiers’ death an in a single stroke improved the lot for women, nurses, and the men who were dying from preventable disease.

Starting with unbridled imagination, Nightingale moved forward without fear to offer her thoughts about what was going on despite her status as a nurse.  She was afforded the chance to see differently because of where she worked but it took an imagination to see exactly the connection between hygiene and disease, perhaps an obvious link through the distorted lens of our retrospection.