Nature, nurture and nepotism - success isn't in your genes, it's in your mind...

Success is a funny thing isn't it? Everyone seems to want it.  I certainly do (in my own way), and perhaps you do too?

Come on, admit it, you want to be successful in life as much as anyone else does.  But what is success exactly?  My definition is likely to be very different from yours, unless we locate it in its abstract sense of the cognitive and emotional outcomes of success (things like a sense of achievement, happiness, security; Maslow territory).

However, there are certain individuals whom I'm sure many of us would agree to consider successful on the basis that they have achieved high status within a particular profession, discipline or area of activity. Political figures, artists, sportspeople, business people etc. etc.

My thinking on this was sparked by an article on the BBC website this morning which attempts to unpick and explain the  success of the Freud family following the recent death of the painter Lucian Freud.  This one family has produced a disproportionate number of individuals who have made an impact on culture and society; from Sigmund's difficult childhood emerged a thinker who gained international notoriety (with, notably, an approach that advocated the encouragement of independent thought in children), and successive generations of the Freud family have consistently achieved highly acclaimed positions in the arts and politics.  So, is this all down to 'good genes'?  Or are there other factors, such as Sigmund's nurturing of independent thought, at play?

Well, we can certainly identify many great dynasties in influential fields such as politics and the arts (the Kennedys and the  Redgraves being obvious examples) which might suggest that family has some influence, but there are, equally, many others who achieve wonderful feats without a family name.  So, does it help to have the name tag?  I can't help but think it does in one area in particular - and this may sound obvious, but it's in the achievement of fame.

There is clearly a combination of social, economic, genetic and cultural capital that the Freud family have (to continue the example), and to which others may not have access. I believe this makes them more likely to achieve celebrated positions - and I say celebrated positions advisedly, because I do not necessarily equate celebrity with success.  Having a famous ancestor or family member is, I believe, more likely to make you famous, but your own definition of success would have to be located in celebrity for this to equal the achievement of it.  Bianca Gascoigne, for example, is a young woman who has appeared on numerous reality TV shows without apparently having achieved significance in any particular field. Why?  Because the ex-footballer Paul Gascoigne is her father.  Does this make her successful?  If she defines the particular kind of celebrity status she has gained as success, then yes. For me, however, this is not success, it's just fame through nepotism.  As with most things in life, it really is all down to your personal view, and the realisation that your view is likely to be very different from the views of others.

Social capital (when you consider it in terms of the connections you have), is of course going to enable those who have it to be in the running for positions to which others may not have access, whether that's a booking for a reality TV show or an internship at an organisation in the field you want to be in (I'm deliberately not touching on acceptance into educational institutions here...).  However, there are very few people who can get away with poor performance in a field which requires skill and/or talent for too long.   Prince William was born into privilege, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't let him fly a Sea King rescue helicopter unless he knew what he was doing...at least I hope not...

So, is there nepotism involved in achieving the most senior positions in our society?  Yes, probably.

Does it matter?  Well, it annoys the hell out of me when it means that talented people don't have the opportunity to make the world better.  But fame?  No thanks.  It's not compatible with my 'live light, learn lots, then pass it on' definition of success...