Woods: Genius of Theodore Roosevelt 



301 



since the dispute will then arise as to 

 the best methods of bringing about this 

 desirable "best interests of all." The 

 "politician" in life may in death be- 

 come the "statesman," but his theories 

 and his weaknesses are always more 

 exposed to searching criticism than is 

 the case in other forms of genius. 



In the light of these considerations, 

 and measured in comparison with other 

 great men, the faults, inconsistencies, 

 or weaknesses of Theodore Roosevelt 

 appear inconsiderable, while the as- 

 tonishing and versatile attainments 

 place him easily amoig the first hundred 

 and fifty o^ the world's most wonderful 

 men. Take a^one the physical or (per- 

 haps better) physiological aspect of his 

 personality. How seldom do we meet 

 with people who have the constantly 

 impelling vital force that Roosevelt 

 had, who are always animated, always 

 inspiring, always talking, or writing, 

 or transforming thoughts into actions 

 — always "feeling bully." If this sort 

 of activity is, as modern physiology 

 would lead us to believe, dependent 

 upon an excessive amount of certain 

 peculiar internal secretions, then, on 

 the bodily side alone, Roosevelt must 

 have been extraordinary.' Although a 

 man of action and known chiefly for 

 his deeds and his relations with his 

 fellow-men, the total output of his 

 literary product, i. e., his published 

 work, exceeds that of any other Harvard 

 man of his day. 



Men of such constant exuberance of 

 spirit, while rare, are not exceedingly 

 uncommon. We all meet them from 

 time to time, chiefly in the business 

 world. They make good promoters. 

 But do we often meet a man of that 

 stamp who is also possessed of one of 

 the most remarkable memories ever 

 given to any human being? If we do, 

 he is as one man in a million. There 

 may be a hundred such persons in the 

 United States today. But of these 

 how many also are endowed with a high 

 moral sense, with a never-failing desire 

 to make the world over in the ways that 

 seem for them unquestionably right? 

 There are such men. History knows 

 them. They are very few in number. 



They are famous. Some of them have 

 been celebrated as preachers and re- 

 formers. 



Now let these three traits, the first 

 two of which are so rare, the third of 

 which is not too common, be united 

 with intellectual curiosity, leading to a 

 variety of interests, which in time be- 

 come coordinated into a broad outlook, 

 and we have our rarer man still — one 

 so rare that not a hundred and fifty 

 men in all history outrank him in fame 

 or eminence. And this is including all 

 forms of activity — that of the painter, 

 the poet, the preacher, the sculptor as 

 well. 



Gladstone may rank with Roosevelt 

 or he may outrank him. Disraeli, 

 Franklin, Pitt, Cromwell, Clive, William 

 the Conqueror, Peter the Great, Pericles, 

 Charlemagne and Julius Caesar may 

 rank with Roosevelt. They may far 

 outrank him. Doubtless some of them 

 do. But the point is that there are so 

 few of these very great names that 

 before we reach the end of the first 

 hundred and fifty we willy-nilly are 

 obliged to include names that certainly 

 do not suggest any more genius or any 

 more greatness than that of Theodore 

 Roosevelt. Let any reader try it for 

 himself and get his friends to help. 

 If he does not, before finishing his first 

 hundred and fifty, then I wager that 

 before finishing his second hundred, he 

 will only be able to bring forward names 

 of a somewhat secondary magnitude. 

 The dazzle will be gone. At least 

 Roosevelt will come in here somewhere. 



In any estimate of genius it is well 

 to have some objective standards of 

 comparison and a list of names as 

 inclusive as possible of all candidates 

 for selection. Such a list can never 

 be entirely satisfactory, but it is at 

 least better than no list, since other- 

 wise many suitable names would be 

 overlooked. No list has been formu- 

 lated attempting to grade great men 

 according to their "pure genius," but 

 there is a useful and suggestive list of 

 "eminent" men based upon encyclo- 

 pedias and biographical dictionaries. 

 It was compiled by J. McKeen Cattell 

 and published in Popular Science 



