If you have read A Little Story, you would probably understand the following rants better. It is, by all measures, of no relevance to you; but I elect to write this and put it here because I believe that there are morals to be learnt from the story.
First of all, some backgrounds about the title. It is said that, reputation is very important to an entity, in a world of imperfect information. People would be likely to project the future course of action of somebody by studying what he has done in the past. A lot of desirable deeds are classified as reputable, and the converse is disreputable. Quite a lot of people make decisions based on the assumption that past behavior affects that in the future.
On top of that, there is a saying that “humans have reputation as trees have bark” (人有面皮, 树有树皮). Humans can’t live in disrepute forever isn’t it? That kind of life wouldn’t be meaningful, or livable perhaps, but somehow there are people who managed to live that way…
Such were the values someone had been brought up in, and he believes those were true. Of course those still remain true, but there may be problems defining what constitutes valid reputation and what is not. Live an honest life constitutes valid reputation. Maintaining a wrinkle-free appearance while one ages is not. (Some may disagree, though. As an ultra-conservative descendant of the Yellow Emperor, I still believe that I should not name my son after someone I greatly respect (i.e. the concept of 避讳), and pray for the avoidance of hair loss, for hair is one of the ancestral gifts 
)
Alas, it is the mis-recognition of the kind of reputation worth defending that got him into trouble. His parents, upon seeing bespectacled kids, told him, without exception, that it must be the consequence of bad practice – watching too much television and gaming too much. This statement was made without consideration to those said kids, and the fact that their son was actually reading far too much (not even stop during eating – serious!).
Perhaps his parents were trying to use the tactic of deterrence. They might think, look, if I told this kid this, perhaps he would not game so much and watch television so much. The outcome was right, he did not watch too much television and play too much game. But the reason behind such behavior is not what his parents envisaged – he was merely more interested in reading and drawing than watching TV and gaming. So his parents were deemed superior in reasoning for the time being.
In the meantime, while he build up his stock of knowledge, his eyesight deteriorated. This became noticeable in 1995. Well, that’s when the stupidity of this little kid started its engine – in the name of defending his reputation, he did not reveal this to anyone. He was quite sophisticated in the power game early in his life.
Perhaps it is desirable to have a graphical depiction of the demand and supply of knowledge over those years. Don’t fret – I’ll try to explain those in as plain a term as possible 
Common sense suggests that a person would (in all probability) accumulate knowledge over his lifetime. In the process, he would forget some, and needs to get it back by revising. And he needs to learn more advanced stuff as time goes by, as sort of building on top of his existing knowledge. The graph just captures this whole thing, in graphic.
The green curve represents the ‘real’ amount of knowledge he learns at a point of time. Real, in the sense that revision is not counted as really learning. The area represents the knowledge ’stock’, or intellectual capital stock, that he has accumulated over time. The red curve is the amount of knowledge that a person is expected to learn at the period of time, plus all the revision he needs to recall the forgotten stuff, and updates to replace those obsolete knowledge. And the area below the red curve is the amount of knowledge one is expected to have up to that point of time (e.g. by now you should know how to write and do multiplication, etc.).
The profile of the red curve (i.e. the shape) is thought to be representative with respect to the kind of schooling kids receive nowadays. Knowledge will be learnt, at quite fast a pace as one is still young, and gradually slows down as one matures. And at some time, probably some time into employment, the demand would begin to decrease. Hence the concave shape. However, the green curve varies from person to person, as different people learns with different style, and at a different speed.
This green curve belongs to that someone. As you can see, early in his life, he proceeds fast, and school work is of no work to him. Has enjoyed a great surplus, learning far more ahead than what he is supposed to know. However, there was a great disruption when he started to suffer from short-sightedness. The rate of learning decreases fast, but still respectable, until 1997. That’s the year when he reaped most of the visible achievements, as analogous to the state of the British Empire in 1922 (1/4 of world’s population and land area, most powerful navy, bla bla bla).
From there, things deteriorate fast. Although he did tell his parents about this for many times, he was promptly silenced. He could not do anything appropriate to straighten the injustice. So much about intellectual ability, indeed.
I should just quote the section of A Little Story, since it more than adequately describes the situation:
Nevertheless the momentum kept him going. He had his best academic performance in 1997, and have won a consolation prize at the state-level general knowledge competition. He did not regard this as meager in view of the circumstances.
But the ballast was too heavy. He simply could not sustain himself with that limited pool of knowledge. Moreover, he did not excel in mathematics. So he slid, from ‘first-tier’, to ‘quasi-first-tier’, and to ’second-tier’.
Gone were the desire to organize super-states.
Gone were the desire of designing airplanes.
Gone were the ability to write great passages and poems.
Gone were his mastery in history and geography.
Gone were the ability to argue at length in just about any subject.
Gone were his ability to socialize.
Gone were his confidence.
Gone were his reputation.
…
(Anything that I missed?)
In the end, it’s British Empire again, but in 1970. Those were, as people said, remnants of a once vast empire, not even have the ability to solve its own problem, let alone to lead the world.
Perhaps it is Nature’s punishment of that someone who wants to make a better world. Or it is simply a sin to out-perform his ancestors intellectually. Or whatever, it doesn’t really matter. Since it has passed.
And now that person does not have a choice but to live within his modest means of accumulating knowledge, and enjoy less-than-satisfactory outcome. After a lost decade of 1995-2005, he would have acclimatized anyway. But perhaps it is a blessing in disguise. Without those disruptions and loss of pride, he couldn’t have learnt the importance of being independent at all cost, physically, intellectually and spiritually. He couldn’t have known a great man known as Benjamin Graham. And he couldn’t have gone to an island off the tip of Malay Peninsula. And he wouldn’t take the importance of this quote to his heart:
In war: Resolution. In defeat: Defiance. In victory: Magnanimity. In peace: Good will.
After all, UK doesn’t seem to be in too bad a shape
I hope you can see not the negative aspects of this story of someone, but the positive ones. Do think independently and make your decisions carefully. If you know something is wrong, avoid it at all cost. If you have done something wrong, correct it at all cost. Don’t defend something wrong just for the sake of preserving false reputation. If not, you may one day be the one writing the story, and I will be sorry to hear that.
