In Page 74 of his book Peter Buffett mentions the quote "Not all who wander are lost" ...actually a better version of the quote, I remember, is probably "Not all who wander are aimless". And so below is the story he shares in conjunction to this quote (Pg 74-77):
"A friend recently told me about a former schoolmate of his, who changed majors practically every semester. He started college intending to become a mechanical engineer. But soon he grew bored with the concrete, hands-on aspect of engineering; he had a hankering for something ethereal and abstract.
So he changed his major to physics. This captivated him for a while, but he found that what he really loved about the subject was the beautiful and orderly patterns it described.
So he switched his major to math, whichwas about nothing but patterns, completely divorced from physical objects. Math held his interests for a semester or two, until he began in feel that his world was becoming too abstract. His mind now yearned for things he could see with his eyes and touch with his hands.
He changed majors again, and this time he changed colleges, too. By now, his parents were no doubt pulling their hair out, and even his friends were wondering if he was simply one of those people who was very bright and incurably flaky. He enrolled at the Rhode Island School of Design as a fine arts major, with a concentration on drawing and painting.
The leap was not as off-the-wall as it might at first seem. The fellow was obsessed with beautiful patterns. But the splendid patterns of mathematics were invisible, and he longed to bring them into the light of day somehow. So why not try to render something analogous to them in a beautifully wrought line or composition or mix of colors?
But- surprise!- the painting option didn't quite work out for this fellow. First of all, he had some doubts as to whether he was talented enough, whether he could translate his intellectual ideas about painting into actual artworks. And aside from that, he found the painter's life too solitary, too removed from the common experiences and conduct of business that connect most people.
So he changed majors yet again, this time to architecture. Architecture was collaborative and social; it was both an art and a business. Design called for a knowledge of physics and of mathematical relationships. It allowed him to use his drawing skills and to exercise his love of patterns. He finally found his calling, right?
Well, almost. There were a couple of things about architecture that still frustrated him. One was that most designs for buildings never got built; they lived and died as blueprints. What about the steel and glass and stone they envisioned to be built from. This fellow found himself getting more and more interested in materials and their different characteristics. In other words, he'd come full circle and was thinking like a mechanical engineer!
And these hypothetical buildings- how would they fit in the pattern of a city, among its grids and contours? How would their esthetics and theirscale and the nature and cost of their materials affect the people who lived and worked in them? What was the larger pattern these buildings would inhabit?
Eureka! He finally had it- the discipline that matched his broadest interests and employed his fullest skills set. He was meant to be an urban planner. He changed his major one last time, worked through a master's degree, and went on to a distinguished and satisfying career.
So-- was this fellow "lost" during the years of his academic wonderings? Or was he following a path that was not yet visible but was nonetheless taking him where we was meant to go?
Comments