You take my friend Fenwick. He is an exceedingly loveable little man. His disposition is so sunny, his character so open, that even the Most Hardened Cynics, of whom my wife is International Chairman, call Fenwick “utterly adorable.” He is the very incarnation of the Boy Scout creed: “trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean (great Scott! but he’s clean), reverent.”
Now you would think that with a personality like that, Fenwick would be just about the most popular man on our block. That is not so. Fenwick is just about the most unpopular man on our block. People can’t stand him. I have seen Sunday-school teachers with unblemished complexions, and account executives with split-level ranch houses, throw conniption fits at the mere mention of Fenwick’s name. Why? Why? I puzzled over this for years, using the finest puzzling equipment money can buy, before I discovered the answer: Fenwick is a man who goes around being logical. He even uses reason at cocktail parties.
Now, most people believe in reason the way they believe in cold showers: It’s O.K. if you don’t overdo it. Very few people are so insensitive as to go around applying logic to other people’s beliefs. The consistent application of reason to human affairs is irrational. It is also dangerous, as you shall soon find out.
The basic trouble is that Fenwick, who is very intelligent, assumes that other people are very intelligent, too. And that, believe it or not, is the way he talks to them. This makes people uneasy, for nothing is more unsettling than to be treated as if you are extremely intelligent—especially by someone you hardly know. To avoid disillusioning such a man requires that you maintain a constant state of alert, and think before you speak, which imposes cruel demands on your brain. It even makes you examine the partly packaged platitudes you have always employed instead of thinking. Few activities tire one out so rapidly.
This is from an essay by Leo Rosten, a long-time friend of Milton and Rose Friedman. “Fenwick” is Milton Friedman. Milton and Rose became friends with Rosten in the 1930s, a fact I didn’t know until I read their autobiography, Two Lucky People. Rosten is the author of, among others, The Joys of Yiddish, a book I’ve had on my shelf and dipped into since the 1980s, when I started wanting to understand Yiddish better (having married into a Jewish family.)
I knew Milton pretty well, having first met him in May 1970. I think Rosten has him exactly right.
Read the whole thing, which is delightful.
READER COMMENTS
Jon Murphy
Jan 12 2024 at 1:15pm
Interesting. And, despite this (or because of?), Milton Friedman was a fantastic communicator.
David Henderson
Jan 12 2024 at 2:49pm
Definitely because.
David Seltzer
Jan 12 2024 at 3:27pm
Jon, Friedman was so clear in explaining TANSTAFL, his students had sweatshirts embroidered with that acronym. Some of the students wearing them sat in the front row and he laughed. After class, he was given one.
john hare
Jan 12 2024 at 6:09pm
On a far lower level than the subject here, I have experienced similar responses. The problem is that I am well aware of my shortcomings and it sometimes seems that others won’t even try. Knowing that I am not that smart, I am left to wonder about the thought processes of some. Fortunately, I can come to places like this and be the odd man out. Gives a bit of balance.
Herb
Jan 12 2024 at 9:04pm
Delightful – Thanks!
Andy Weintraub
Jan 12 2024 at 9:34pm
So..we know who Fenwick was. But who was Rupert Shmidlapp?
Walter Boggs
Jan 12 2024 at 9:41pm
As a kid in the 1960s, I devoured every book on the Humor shelf at the library. I remember Leo Rosten’s books well, thanks for reminding me.
Monte
Jan 12 2024 at 10:41pm
“Fenwick” was only annoying to those with whom he debated. You could argue that he was the most interesting man in the world (to borrow from the Dos Equis beer advertising campaign). He was, to me, a blend of 3 famous T.V. characters: Mr. Magoo (short and affable), Lt. Columbo (annoyingly and irritatingly analytical), and Spock (logic tempered by rationality).
The only point he would concede in a debate (as Rosten alludes to) was that his opponent might be right for the wrong reasons. Aaarrrrgghhh!
Ahmed Fares
Jan 13 2024 at 10:15pm
“I’m on your side, but you’re not” Milton Friedman against Equal Pay Laws
The quote above comes at the end of the short video.
Comments are closed.