The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them not by their contemporaries

Greatness is something that most of our humans admire with veneration. One can produce high principles and social integrity just by being labeled with ‘greatness’. Then one might ask: what makes a person great, and who endows someone as great? This is a challenging question as the standard depends on the shared anticipation of the current society and is likely to change in near future. This essay will argue the extent of ambiguity in labeling ‘greatness’ to certain individuals by providing several evidence and assumptions.
Firstly, when a certain part of an individual meets the social expectation, then it is likely that (s)he becomes influential enough to produce certain values. Especially for those fields that require contemporary fame and popularity, ingenious capabilities of a person have flourished in one’s lifetime. For example, the well known performance and visual artist Marina Abramovic, now classified as one of the most influential figures in the world, showed how emotional instincts of human beings can be both splendid and horrid at the same time. The influence she gave throughout the world was notable, since her artwork and performancing video even spread to the ones who are not familiar to the art field. Her influence raised several philosophical questions in regard to pondering on our humanity, and triggered a shift in concepts of fundamental emotions. If her work did not happen to be acknowledged by her contemporaries, it is possible that she might have vanished into the shadows of history. Thus, we may argue that full consent and significance in the current form of society shall be the primary factor in evaluating the greatness of an individual.
However, even if the anticipation is not met in present time there are certain other fields in which one’s value shows slow progress. For instance, the field of literary works largely has its strict standard and high ideals in terms of assessing the greatness of an author. While some are being acknowledged and bestowed admiration among the contemporaries, such as Toni Morrison the author of <Beloved> and William Burroughs the author of <Naked Lunch>, authors who beget posthumous fame last longer as great with significant value and ceaselessly being cited. Franz Kafka might be a representative figure who did not gain any recognition during his lifetime but gained tremendous fame after his death. There are now numerous journals and articles about Kafka as the father of modernity in literature and the great figure who revealed the absurdity of human species. Thus, in some fields where values are being evaluated in the long term, the greatness of a person might be decided after one’s death.
Nevertheless, we may not rush into a quick conclusion that the significance of certain figures can be decided whether untimely or timely. The importance lies in its social context in which value changes due to the complexity of cultural, economical, and political change. It is the fortuitousness of the social value, from which we can evaluate the greatness of an individual. Thus, even if admired among family members and neighbors by one’s nobility and loftiness, he or she might not be able to gain any influential power due to lack of social importance. Yet these individuals can be venerated after several centuries later, when the social context eventually meets with one’s life career. The countless women who have been supportive and enduring in terms of living through patriarchal societies are now being recognized as noteworthy individuals. That is, we may never know whether it is before death or after, when it is a proper time to illuminate one’s greatness.
In conclusion, the value of certain behaviors of individuals or a lifetime work are evaluated subjectively, so that we shall be always alert by its arbitrariness in categorizing someone as great or not.