rejected (part 2)

From what I've read, some intelligent people often see themselves as superior over average people. Whether this has to do with compensating for what they lack in other aspects of their lives and themselves (physicality, lack of social skills, economic status, low self-esteem etc.) is open to debate. Many intelligent types (and I mean those who are highly or particularly intelligent) tend to be less emotionally developed compared to most everyone else, particularly in the realm of social interaction, which suggests struggles or some kind of difficulty in childhood. This was certainly the case, I believe, with my first lover, with whom I had a relationship that lasted about five years and ended badly.

Perhaps as children, when they first exhibit above average intelligence, these exceptionally gifted youngsters were pushed by their parents to further develop this talent and in the process the other important aspects were neglected - social intercourse with other children, the cultivation of coping mechanisms, overall emotional development.

Another, more likely, possibility, is that S is quite simply an intellectual snob. I noticed that during our conversations he usually was the dominant speaker, and sometimes even took pleasure in all his declarations and insights, which was fine, but one thing that was lacking that gave me a glimpse into his possibly underdeveloped social skills coupled with an overblown self view: he practically never showed interest in, much less ask for, my opinion on things, or how I felt about something. In fact I was the one asking him things about himself. He claimed that he prefers not to ask anyone he converses with any questions other than whatever personal information the other conversant volunteers. But I've always thought that when one is interested in another person, especially as a potential friend or romantic interest, one is naturally inclined to want to know more about that person, yes? Especially on a first date?

Which led me to this guess: he gets off on having a captive audience to hear how mighty he is in his opinions and declarations. It boosts his ego. It's certainly possible, I've come across people like this in the past.

There's yet something else. He emailed me a photograph he took. It was black & white, a shot of a modern stucco one story building set precariously on a very low cliff somewhere in L.A. The most interesting part of it was the extreme angle from which he took it. He called me shortly after he sent it and I asked him because I wasn't sure if it was part of his work in contracting that he took this picture or if it was any kind of technical research or something else. He said that it was personal and I picked up aggravation in his voice.

I explained that I wasn't sure in what context the picture was made because he does various kinds of work, all of them to do with technical skills in construction, or machinery, or carpentry. Later on in the conversation I announced that I had to go, I had things to do, and it was late. As he said good bye I sensed deflation in his voice; he was obviously upset about something and I didn't know what it was. Was he hurt that I didn't automatically figure out that he was attempting to make art? Was he trying to make his way to my level in that I'm a formally trained artist with the education and culture, and he thought I had snubbed him by mistaking his attempt for something else not related to art?

The next morning I received his email in which he stated we were incompatible and that he reserved the right not to explain why.